IR 05000346/1985025
| ML20138N719 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1985 |
| From: | Jackiw I NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138N660 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM 50-346-85-25, NUDOCS 8512240129 | |
| Download: ML20138N719 (51) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:~ ~ ~ fs r' 7:%.jf :x - , ~ w.
< , =; . ~ .. _Y ' Gj '
m , > %. [j,L. - e ~ . ~
, , , -. x
- ..
' ~,.. - ', , , ..,s, , ..
' ,( ^ ( ~ e ' U. S D NUCLEAR, REGULATORY! COMISSION i ~' .
.. - , ' um/ ~ - [l
- REGION.III-
. , . ' -
x - , , ' + ,
'i.~. '. epprt No 50 346/85025(DRP) ' -
. am " - .. .. . TLicense No.-NPF-3 . Docket No.;50-3461, - , - ~
- !Licenseei iToledo' Edison
- Congiany '
l Edison'Plazab 300 Madison Avenue w$ - -- eToledo,10HL43652 , , , E
- Ficility Name
- ' Davis-Bessel1/
-
.... .s - e.. .. ' T< LInspectionfAti 10ak Harbor,-OH-
-
f l:Inspecti.on Conduhtedi JAugust 6 through November 4, 1985 . ," - )Inspeitors: IW.7G.! Rogers: . ' , .. _ .
p ' iD. 'C..Kosloff ' ~ ' w .. > <
- BI[LilBurges's ;
j T ~ :n .. >x -_."
aD.jS.' Butler - . t I , C ,
- 1P. R. Wohld j
-.- . . - , ..: - ~ , - ' ' f C.l D.~ :[ Jones.- ' . - - i , , - . / , e
- sv-s.
$ Approved By: 11.' ackiw ChiefL M// M. _ . - lReac r? Pro'ects1Section 2B Ddte / ': M .3 y y; .. .; yl< QInspection'SummaryL , , .. p~ [ Inspection on' August 6:through November 4, 1985 (Report No. 50-346/85025(DRP)) ge-- 3 Areas Inspected: Special inspection by resident and regional inspectors-of i - - 111censee actions on the root ~cause : investigation of malfunctioning: equipment ', ?.,"during/the. transient"of June 9,'1985.s~ Routine,' unannounced inspection of:
- previous: inspection findings,Loperationa12 safety, Action Plan Observation,
' 7TMI4 Action Items,: Licensee Event: Reports.(LER),. maintenance, regional requests, '
- ";
- jsenior managementifacility tours, Interim Performance Enhancement Program, csurveillance-andsindependent: reactor coolant ~ system _ leakage. determination.
m.
- ,
.. -. ,. m-8512240129:851217 , PDR-ADOCK 05000346 ~
> < :G'_ _ i PDR-g , , - ,. '<j%'. ' -[ ' + ' ' , ,,,,,....~,_4 ..,,, _,,,,, _. _.,,.,, _,.., _,,.,_,,,,,,,.yy.. ., _.,, ..,,___,,., _ .2-.y,., + ... _
w: ', s - The-inspection involved 535 insper.cor-hours onsite by six-NRC. inspectors i fincluding 102 inspector-hours during off-shifts.
.Results: _Of the twelve areas' inspected,ino violations or-deviations were , . identified in seven; areas' one violationowasLidentified,in the area ofLER , freview (failure to meet:the; action statement of ~ a limiting condition for
- operation -; paragraph 6),'one violation was in the maintenance area (failure-1toluseia procedure during the performance'of maintenanceT paragraph 7), and w
.one violation'was identified in'the areas of action planfobservation and . operational = safety (failure.to initiate a timely report of a condition _ . adverse to quality - paragraphs 3 and 4).
,. .. W - - .
- - . - - -- .. . -. _ _ _. --.
( 'l ~ ' = ' &{%f#" .
- ,.- ~
' -
- '
. . \\ ' w - < n' _
V" .: n G 'q
9_
- ,,. ,, _ ^ ' DETAILS: , '
[ ;;L ' = - s _ . , W., n -. ~ .. . ' ~ Wp^ ~~1!'
- Persons Contacted:
. f - ' ~ > 'a? l Toledo 'Edif.on1 ' , , . . . _ _ ?J. WilliamsF Jr.,fSenior Vice President Nuclear > _nu Sn .T.LMurray,iNuclear' Mission; Assistant Vice1Presidentz _ .
- L. Storz,cPlant Manager-
. < ~.iS X Quennoz',sNuclear Engineering Group Director .. > *S.!Smithi Assistant Plant Manager,.. Maintenance
- ,
- ,tM.2Schefers,'Superi6tendent of Planning
.;g.
, -:iW.? 0' Conner,- Assistant Plant Manager, Operations ~- , O.;Mavro,1 Nuclear.EngineeringlGeneral Manager.
~ , . .D. flee,1 Plant'O_utage Manager ~ , C. Dafts..QA Director - ' E
- J. -l Fari s,o Admi nistrative " Coordi nator
,, 'J.L:,Ligenfelter, Operations Engineering Manager ' - > c + ?*M.7 Stewart,L Nuclear Training : Director : N _ R. -Peters,1 Nuclearj Licensing Manager - < '
- SWWideman,'cSenio~rLicensing: Specialist-
. r ' BJi: Wood; Mechanicalland Structural Engineering Manager - > . . f- /*J.'Byrnec; Quality.AssuranceAuditor '
- T.=;Stiefel,: Document Control Coordinator-J*JF Helle',; Director, Nuclear Facility Engineering'
,. QANRC; N *,N-- - - ' b - w/i*W.IRogers,iSenior:ResidentInspector-M *D.!Kosloff,iResident Inspector l!*D.XButlerhRegionalL. Inspector: i . s .-
- B.-3Burgessp.. Project Inspector:
~ .P.1Wohld,LReg onallInspector-i . n y - , - CJJones, RegionalfInspector:
- ,
, <.7
- DenotesKthose' personnel: attending the-November 1, 1985 exit.
L ~ 6The inspectors alsoiinterv.iewed other. license'e employees,-including ~ , , members:of the technical,1 operations,< maintenance, I&C,~ training, health-l physi.cs and nuclear materials management ~ department. staff.
120 iLice$see Action on Previous' Inspection Findings - ~ ~ ~ - ~fa 1(0 pen) Open Item"(346/80025-04):' Implementation of Facility Change ~ $, , Request (FCR)'80-100 and'those FCRs associated'with the loss of NNI
- on June 24,;1982.
FCR'80-100 tis'under final 1 review by the cognizant- ~
- '
iengineering supervisor? prior'to storage in the records vault.- The-physical l work was' complete on October 28; 1983; Other FCRs associated
, - withcloss of NNI,'shall be inspected in a future report.
,
+ ..h -. ~ 3.
' - f .
c - - - - y .. m.: ~ y }gj '*y- - ;, ,, T
'
- b: m ~ ' ~ W' - - at ', .~ b.y J(Open))Violationi(346/81003-04): Failure to properly implement . - . _ _. ,. _ - .- - .. (~ - ~ ' b Regulatory Guide.1.33. The: licensee's response. addressed the five-Jsections; outlined:in-the notice of violation,1a through e.
-Sections;c; " ,
- A,N
. , "and d were closedtin IER 81016 and 84007. 2The inspector reviewed. ' - l 1, l '
- Sections b. and f elduring 'this inspection _ period.' iSection b dealt with personnel identifled.as;having.the authority to complete a'Generall
' . ,r" WMaterial Inspection Checklist.(GMIC).; The inspectorL. verified that' i f. Procedure:NFES-071, " Purchase: Requests for Spare and Replacement-
_
- Parts",1waslissued designating the cognizant engineering. supervisor
< . . as,the;individualfresponsible forifilling out the instructions on the-
GMIC.
Section e addressed procedure control and review. 1The 'f ' ilicensee~ committed to establish an administrative' assistant position: _
- ito' file: control room procedures. lThe inspector verified that.the- - administrative-'assistantLposition had been' created and: personnel:are
% functioning in that ' capacity. i Also, in their: response to Section e -
the licensee committed to have the. Station Review Board (SRB) review.
>< _ 'a11' vendor {manualsused'insafety_related. maintenance. The original.
p - ": review of vendor manuals was performed but no program'wassestablished > to continue:the SRB review.' ~This situation.was, identified by the '
- ~
slicensee following a generaltdiscussion'with the inspector on' vendor '
- manual. control'. LThe licensee: suspended all safety-related work
< ,2 einvolvi_ng; vendor manuals until proper controls could be. established.
!Procedu_re_AD.1805.00, " Procedure Preparation and Maintenance", was ^ v v modified:to require { specific.sectionstof vendor manuals be _ . _incorporatedLinto procedures-designated:VM_(vendor manual). The VM procedures-then receive'the same review'as any.other safety-related f .. 1 * M procedure,Lincluding SRBLrev_iew..l Specific" maintenance' work was M resumed!following review and, issuance'of the VM procedure pertaining '
. " "to the: maintenance work JSectionsLb and e'of this" item are closed.
% (Section a will be-the sut ject of-a future _ inspection.
? Ec.- (Closed) Violation (346/82009-01): Failure to properly utilize the jumper and lifted!wireflog.
The-inspector verified through record
, " ' review thatithe uncontrolled wires had been spared in1 Supplement 10 , ito FCR:80-05.
This-item is' closed.
4d.
(Closed). Violation (346/82034-01): Failure to test the computer
- alarms associated with quadrant-power tilt, axial power imbalance-
~ t _and control! rod position.' Three corrective actions were to be- ~ .z j performed.' - Action one was closed in~IER 84028. Actions two and 'three were reported' incomplete in IER 84028.
The inspector again reviewed' actions two and three.
Action two is closed as a result .~ - _ of a! modification of the' corrective action in theilicensee's response to. violation'346/84028-01; -Action three was closed based on the ~ 1 modification'of ST 5010.03, " Post Refueling Physics Testing", dated p"
- January 27, 1985, frequiring an~ operability check of the control rod drive sequence ~ alarm.
All actions associated with this item are _ ' closed.
w r.
/(Closed)-Violation (346/83019-05): Failure to implement the quality e
- assurance' program in the Nuclear Training Department.
The licensee's
- .responseTto the violation ~ contained five sections.
Section one " .
4 + ~ , . I 9' %
~ -- ' ~ ~ ' ~ , - a.- - > %A M -. a s
'&
- }
.
- g y
,'; , ~~ ' > ' < ,$
W ", ,. _ r^ .y , ' ' ,.
- <;
' ' ' ' ;~ - w -
. ,g . . ,~ , . m _ . - Ecommitt'dthelicensebto:pefform~adiagnosticof.'thetraining' ~ ~ e .,- Jg y*, * ? program. LTheidiagnosticlwas> completed on:Apr.il-24,E1984;
,<a (Implementation of correctiveiactions.forithe problems 1 identified ' .' - ' - f ' lin the' diagnostic willibe monitored 'as 'IPEPf item ;RP-08013.
~ V $ l Sectio'n two committed.the(licensee 1to establish procedures-iw ' < ; controlling,all " quality / activities"; performed by:the training; a _
wg s department.: tThese: procedures have.been issued in:the Nuclear: , , V- - ! Services Manual as:Partf1II.C.' Section three committed;the_.
" ,W,- - a slicenseeLto establish procedures throughout~the nuclear mission-M
- _
_'iforjreportingiand correcting conditions adve'rse to quality.
The; m
' , rprocedures;have been established. LSection;four commitred the: - , M A - licensee to establiskafmanagement11evel training oversight.
- -
> committee" chaired by-the NuclearLServices' Director _to provideL , ,. s " (the Nuclear' Services' Director with' approval offall training- _ iconducted-in;the! nuclear mission in accordance..with the Quality - MF-, - . eAss'urance Manual.: The' oversight' committee was-established and ' ilater abolished when'a Quality Assurance Manua13re' vision transferred-dQ1 ,,_ q3 ~ training responsibility:for the. nuclear mission to the appropriate ,7 7 '
- division!directorandLtheinucleartrainingdepartment.
Section five s . ,
-
- committed theilicenseelto. develop a^ procedure for the requalificationi
' training of non-licensed operators., Administrative Procedure;AD1828.16,- l'.'Non-Licensed L0perator Proficiency Training"Thas been. issued. All '- ,, _ i 1 _
- corrective 0 actions for this violation withuthe exception of the W
fdiagnostic implementation 1are considered complete.
, .[' If.i :I(Closed)iViolation[(346/84001-06): Surveillance test not suspended =l v.
~ -when requiredA 1The inspector, verified that.the administrative
c - ' procedure governing:the; performance of surveillance testing was-J .- - 'imodified and~providesiadequate direction for; suspension of.:a - . ~" ' , !surveillanceitest. JThe inspactoriverified that ST 5031.01, " Safety.' _ ; ~ < y ~ Features Actuation: System'Nonthly Test",iwasJmodified to require ' '
- 4thatjthefplant computer be operable priorito running the' test.
i;Thistitem is closed.- ~ ' '~ y' ' s ~ ~ -.... . 7, - g.
1(Clos'ed)1 Violation 2(346/84006-02): Failure to take' adequate T ' corrective: action. J.The11nspector determined that the situation ' /4 r .1-was discussed'with the1 individuals involved and based on this ,,. M _ " - Ediscussion thisiitemiis' closed.
- ' " . . . .. ', Eh2 [(Closed)'Open! Item (346/84006-03): Inaccurate' dimension on the ..* ~ edrawing for hanger '33A-HCB-2-H15.
Drawing HL-233A was. revised to ' sindicate the~ correct dimension in' Revision 1 to the drawing dated ' ~ JJune 20,11984. This item is? closed.
wi - ' , > e - yi.
L(Closed): Unresolved Item-(346/84006-04): Hanger drawings do not ~ ' creflect the as-built condition ~ of the hangers. ' This matter has been l ~ ' fresolved.by the commitments _ addressed in Confirmatory Action Letters ' -;85-03fand 85-13,.the inspection documented in IER85013 and by the ~ i
L11censee'scresponse to_ violation 346/85013-03.
This item is closed.
- - % ' (.. s
,' - , , ' . , r J
- - - ~n %... _,. - - - ,- , - _ ;g[m. ;, - y } n na s: ., }L _' ' &: _, m _ . , . -
l $l~' , r., " ' [ . ' fj.
L(Closed) OpeniItem UN6/64007-03): Lack' of writtenLinstructions for ' ~* F~; ! scrapping used ~ material.J AD 1847.00, " Station Materials Control.", was - ~ revised.on October (4,?1985,: adding:Section 9, which controls the. -! -w f-TactionsLtaken:toidispose'of excess material.
This item is closed.
ea L k.'J(Open);Vio1Nion(346/840'2-02): Safety-related electrical: equipment
~ ' 7 '; {waslnot protected from) inadvertent fire protection system actuation - 3 in accordance1with drawing M-269. 'Thel inspector verified that , training of personnel,to~ Maintenance Procedure MP 1410.63, " Electrical . % C~ Maintenance' Guidelines"_,.and Instrument Control Procedure IC:2601.04, ' - "
^ ' SprayiShields",-had been: formalized and'that the training ~had been o - . completed pr.ior.to the'commitwent.'date of' April. 30, 1985. ~This item '
' > . remains?open pending the-inspection ofz corrective: action taken for fdeficient. junction'. boxes ~. un , ,
^ 11.
z(Closed)UnresolvediItem(346/84019-15): OseLof " technically trained ' - lindividuals"cas.: administrative assistants. :The licensee's commitment ,was;11mited to utilizing administrative. assistants for control'of' ' iprocedure: files. : Based on;the inspector's review, the current ' M; " qualification. requirements for_the position appear-adequate.
' . " '_.~ < Administrative: assistant ~ training is on-the-job and the: inspector
- has'notlidentifiedfsignificant errors. caused by these indi"iduals.
1Therefore, the commitment has been met and'the unresolved item is " '
C closed. 3However; thellicensee has instituted alqualification card R concept to! standardize on-the'-job training. LThis qualification ~ ' mechanism is not' delineated in' administrative: procedures.
The ' , cinspectorcrequested~that the~ qualification card je controlled ~by-J- a procedure'and pending. implementation this item is considered.open- , L(346/85025-02).
- m.
'(Closed)1 Violation;(346/84028-01): Incdequate corrective actions < _ Jassociated with7 Technical _ Specification related computer alarms.
The inspector verified that the appropriate procedures were' revised, "
'that a computerized ~ tracking system was initiated by the Nuclear
- _ Licensing Department and that additionalfpersonnel have been assigned ito the Licensing department. =This item is' closed.
' ? n'.. (Closed) Violation (346/84028-09): Failure to perform the fire hose ~ -inspection required by surveillance requirement 4.7.9.3~of the ' Technical Specifications.. The inspector. verified ~ through discussion . ith the. surveillance test. engineer that critical' surveillance tests- ? w sare' reviewed' daily Monday through Friday.
The inspector observed , ithat?the surveillance test schedule system had been incorporated - into:the Davis-Besse Maintenance Management System.' This-item is " ,
- closed.
. fo.
(Closed)LViolation (346/84028-10): Failure to issue a 10 CFR 50.73 report to the.NRC~in-the required 30' days.
Review of the licensee ~ event reports made.from January to November of 1985 revealed that the reports _were_ issued within the specified time period.
This item g-is closed.
.v'
. Y
- .
- -- - m .- - --r- , - -- - . - , ,- ., ,, - -
3 - p:g [ ,,- , , ;
- , , ) + n.:y- , , , . [c ' ' - 3x uy ;;
- ~
. _ ., , + - . , , w . ,w ~ .- {
N x .I lpa x(0pe'n)L0 pen"Itemi(346/85003-06):;s. Restoration of ventilation ductwork-
- @(
' e .*- to long' term acceptance criteria. 7All corrective: action has.been - - J' L.
L ; performed except1 implementation:oflFCR 85-039 which modifies the~ .C containment? purge 1exhaustM radwaste' supply and radwaste' exhaust'.. m - ' ,
A "ductworkr iThiscites'will:be reviewed when.FCR-85-039"is complete.
oum - _. ~((Closed); Unresolved.' Item)(346/85003-07):- Four 10.CFR 50.73 reports -..- - .... ?WV' ^~ ! submitted to the-NRC more-than 30 days after.the1 reportable q; a "f '
- occurrence. 4The(licensee.',s response and:their corrective action'to-
' - iviolation-84028-10 was(adequate for'this item; 'This' item-is closed.
' . > - -
- -
.- ... - -.. _ . - -. ., ? sr.
(Closed)LUnresolv'ed Item'(346/85003-09): Lack of-procedure on-the ijob-sitepfor repairiof;the emergency diesel generators. This-f ., - f:, Leoncern wasfaddressed byiviolation'346/85012-01 dealing with the' - !same subject.::This. item tis: closed.
' . m
- ,
- , ;g
- ;
- V
,- c [c
- s.;: [(0 pen)i0 pen lItEnf(346/85004-11): Job / task analysis for maintenance
'~.1 ,.s : personnel.c Vob analysis has been completed;.however,Ltask analysis g 5A f A ;is.notfcomplete: Thisjitem;willibe reviewed in'a'later inspection.
. _. ~. ~ _ m.. ? .1.
' o -
< _ _.
m. m _ . , , @Y "2, ' < it/' 1(Closed) Open Item (346/85004-12): Review training program and- ' m Jprovide proce fural ' controls: to assure an:auditable path from D, i gevaluationLresults to:subsequentilesson plans.
The inspector P.J -
- l verified that a' procedure was-'iniplace to require'the inclusion.
- ' c.
~ fof; training exam evaluation deficiencies into succeeding lesson . ' ~. ' - fplans..sThis: item is' closed.
- , . u. 3 j(Closed)f0penLItem:(346/85004-13): Lackadaisical attitude toward ' p' ,- -training exhibited.by non-operator training personnel. ;The inspector ~ ,__ _ - l attended several non-operator. training. classes during the inspection ' period. ; The classes -started at their. appointed _ times and the trainees %. y . M V~- lexhibited an-attentive ~and receptive: attitude toward the instructor .
' ' ~ ' 'and:the presentation. 1This: item is closed.
^
. ..... Establishment of a-Nuclear 7 M :(Closed)tOpen Item (346/85004-14): m v 'MaintenanceLTraining Manager.
The 1nspector reviewed the position _ Ldescription and the resume of the Nuclear Maintenance Training Manager.
v; - - The individualihired met lthe job description requirement for the ' iposition.- This item is closed.
. lw.
(0 pen)'OpenlItem (346/85004-15): Establishment of a-policy statement "
Land /or procedura1Lcontrols for identified training areas essential Lto_the quality of=.the training program.
The licensee's procedures are being modified to conform to recent changes'to the plant ' ~ The planned organization'and the Quality Assurance manual.
- . procedural ' control system will have three tiers: 1). Nuclear Mission LProcedures,'2)' Division; Level Procedures.and, 3) Administrative " - iProcedures. lThe licensee-is now evaluating the' distribution of the - 1 current' Nuclear Services; Department procedures into the three tiers m . J-mentioned above. 'The item will be inspected in a future inspection.
-, [ , ? , w y nx . <c
' , up , - -, - n= y . _ N_ m%,'yY ou b, ~' % - ~ ' - > ,. &&Ey f .;, . - ? ~ - , n
. , _ ?- ,* , ~ ' . , y
- q._
. s s h,
, , Q y . ' % m ,a '_ .... . Ns xb[(Closed)Open:Ites;(346/85008-01(DRS)):.Finaliapproval.ofa . MW6'
- administrative procedure forcinservice inspection. 7The licensee
M.
- -. ' ' scompleted and approved.' administrative ~ Procedure A01838.03p"ASME '
- ' '
' ' " SectionT XI LIn' service Testing of Pumps 1 and; Valves".. The inspector: ' ifound thatithe procedure fully implemented the inserv.iceLtesting
. C-
- program foripumps'and valves. 'This item is~ closed,
' ' w3 ._, - ;u y _ _ _
== , C' M y.- L (Cl osed) ' Open (I tes :(346/85008-04(DRS)): : -Valve' stroke failures were ' J: 4 ~ inotireported, trended or;the; corrective:actionfidentified.within the7 y. ' l' f'%w# Jsurveillance program _was not.a'ccomplished. uThe; inspector. reviewed: !administrativeiProcedure.AD1838.03, "ASME.Section XI Inservice ~ e ~n 6 JTesting 'of Pumps and' Valves"',: for' implementation' of. the above p< ? mentioned. items. :The procedure,:in Section 5;3.2 (Analysis of ' - . - g Results),;has giv'en the1 Surveillance Test.Engineeri(STE) overall: " ' y, v s ~ ,
_ .fresponsibility4 for; reporting l_ trending:and1 initiating ~ corrective J
- -action M Followingethe? corrective actionithe results are' reviewed < ' ?by a designatedfreviewer?who informs the STElof any needed changes.
^
' - - +This; item,is closed.
, p ,
- -y
- >
- z.,i(Closed)[0' pen!ItemT(346/85008-05(DRS)):iServic'ewater-pumpvibration-
' ~
rmeasurement11ocations>were covered with paint. -The. licensee removed 1.R ^ -
- DN'-
~ Lthe: paint from the vibration measurement: points'. The inspector: j i ur 4 7 verified for all(three serviceiwater pumps that the markings were- . +y ' --located.90Ldegreesiapart and in both the vertical:and horizontal > , ', , _
- planes. 1This item is closed.
T-f~'aabE(C'losid)Violationf(346/85010-01): ' Failure to identify that valve- ~ .RC229A did not meet its-stroke time during performance of ST5099.08,.
. ~ " Miscellaneous: Valves-Quarterly Test". :.The finspector. verified that , ^ ~ x ~ , ' n 1' the_ personnel. involved were counseled, operations shift personnel ' r - iwere? briefed onLthis incident andLST5099.08 was revised'to require ' ' ' _ s - ? acceptance criteria 1 verification _ sign-offs for-each valve stroked-iduring the ; test versus La: single. sign-off forza11-_the va.1ves.
A ' , ._ . . review of similar: procedures resulted..in like revisions to' nine ~~ '" e l other procedures.~:This item is closed.
- . .-bb.
(Closedj~ Violation _.(346/85010-03)': Failure to implement the' Shift '
- Technical-Advi'sor requalification program. The
- inspector confirmed
"~ tthat'_thei licens'ee had modified the retraining program to a biennial P _' ~ ' ' M _ requalification schedule.
This-item is closed.' _- e-fcc; g(Clo' sed) Open Item (346/85020-03): - Determination of the cause of the ~
, smalfunction;offthe No':1' auxiliary feedwater (AFW). pump turbine ' l' governor. on LJune ~ 2, ;1985.- (Corrective actions for' the -June. 9,1985, % transient. include; replacement of the No. 1 AFW pump turbine' governor
- @
s with a~new style' governor. Therefore, further review of this. item is ~ ' ,
J unneces_sary and;it itLclosed.
- . .j
- dd.L:(Closed) Open' Item.(346/85021-02):
Isolation of control air supply to valve MU23. The licensee's investigation concluded that valve ' ' isolation -was due'to human error although no specific individual could be identified.
This item is closed.
'.,. , . -
- .
. A -
pa,
,
- ,, , _ , , W, a i E L' -
' y ' ' " ' ' p% k ' } '. g-l ,' , p~ - 4.,,. y , t pg - - , , , < _
a . .... . '.. - ., ' , j~ir=^?:.?ee.T[(Closed)lUnresolvedItem'(346/85021-03): : Lack of reliefifor fire-s , t# ~ JA s -. swatches.'%The inspector?s> review revealed that the situation was not" p' n A"". m consister.t with theylicensee'sl administrative procedures-controlling- , -
- _
. lovertimeLand~the overtime: guidelines 7of NUREG 0737 as amended by: - ' ? "
' (Generic Letter 82-12.m The inspector ~did-notiiss'ue a deviation or:a- %q - ~ ' (violation'because: 3(1) Theiphysical; condition of.the fire watches.
my - twasDidentified by the licensee just prior to; the L nspector identifying-i TL y. 1thelsituation and immediate corrective 1 action was taken to relieve ' i - ("- '
4:thetindividuals;involvedQ (2) lit: appears that all fire watch duties-Jwere carried out even1though the' personnel were extremely tired.
m F,D' L
- (3) PromptE1ong term corrective action was included-in generic;
.. ~ guidance;memoiPOL-28-1:which requires' the shift supervisor to assure , ^.. ', ?adherenceEto; overtime rules by;all fire watch personnel.
Fire: < On Jwatchersiare Oas~ identified on'a list ~ posted by the' fire watch R
- supervisor inithe. shift: supervisor's office. ~This decision is Rc consistent with the genera 11 statement of policy and procedure for
A ry - tNRCienforcement actions.. This' item is closed.~ f ' , W.
.ff.
(Closed)-Open: Item'(346/85022-05):. Rainwater bbserved in the annulus a / area. ;Following-an-inspection, the licensee. repaired two cracked 1 V' helbows found.in the drain piping'. No rainwater was observed by the --^
- inspector,inithe. annulus
- area during a rain storm after the-piping
. 'rc as repairedi This'ites;is closed.
w >
. P 3."
[0perationa11 Safety Verification < . - . . . . - MThe$ ins'pector}observedcontrol;roomoperations,reviewedapplicable" loss l'and conducted discussions with control room operators during the' month: Tof: August, September, October and. November.
The inspector verified the ~ .. f ' ~ operability.ofJselected_ emergency: systems,Lreviewed tagout records and' verified proper retu'rn-to service of affected components.
Tours of the- ' < 'T* iauxiliar9Jreactorand.turbinebuildingswereconductedtoobserveplant - . iequipment! conditions, including-potential fire hazards, fluid-leaks _ and s _ A J ? excessive vibrations and toLverifysthat' maintenance ~ requests _had been' . _
- .
initiated for eq'uipment in need ofzmaintenance.
The inspector. observed l plant housekeeping and cleanliness conditions, and' verified implementatien- ~ ' , , '
- of radiation
- protection controls.
The inspector:by observation,and direct.
m
- interview verified thatt the physical : security plan was being implemented
~ Lin accordance.with the station security plan. -During the months of , e O August, September and October the inspector walked down the accessible ' __
- portionsTof the Emergency Diesel Generator and Firewater, Pump systems to j.c
- verify. operability.
- While<touringithe the_ protected area grounds, the inspector noted some p
iminor discrepant _ storage' practices'in'a level D laydown area.
These - ~' . D
- problems;wereidiscussed with the licensee and immediately corrected.
4 2This: matter'is considered closed.
- , 1During the inspection period the inspector determined through discussion - ' "with.the licensee-thatca number oflFCRs have been completed but not .. closed out'due to a-slow closeout process. -Review of the licensee's corrective ~ action' to: resolve this FCR closeout " backlog" is an open item W- - . ';
- (346/85025-01).
- , . 'u.~. _.
' . < . ' f L '~ .--.-..-.--.-+.m.--+.--.--.w..m .,-e--,.- -, - - - -.-, - - -- -..<
- S .., . t.
^ fWhile. reviewing system problem reports generated by the licensee's , - - fengineering personnel, the inspector noted that the architect-engineer 1(
- had/ informed theilicensee via letter received on October 11,-1985, that
- p"". both.the air-cooled and water-cooled subsystems of the' control room emergency; ventilation. system (CREVS) are required to be operable at all . w? 1timesJfor the system to be considered; operable. Before receiving the ' letter,.the licensee considered the water-cooled subsystem unnecessary for ~ - CREVS; operability.
Once the' problem was _ identified to the licensee,' a Condition Adverse to - Quality report was.not generated. Discussion with.the'first person.to receive the information.revealedithat although he did recognize.the 'importance, he did not think-it was his responsibility to prepare such a ! report. He had, however, informed-the engineer responsible for this system.. The responsible engineer subsequently directed troubleshooting to ! be performed.on the water-cooled subsystem. Troubleshooting results were
- . documented in a systems problem report but a Condition Adverse to Quality report was not generated attthat time._ This communication path bypassed
- the method established for.evaluatingLthe reportability of conditions
' Ladverse to quality. - ' A' Deviation Report (DVR) was written on November 4, 1985,.after_ personnel aware of the conditions adverse to quality requirements.had read the system problem report and instructed the ' ' Lresponsible. system engineer to write the DVR.
, LThe. inspector' reviewed the training _ records of the; responsible system engineer andl determined that the engineer had read the engineering conditions adverse toLquality_ procedure three-times in the last year 'underLthe. required reading program for engineers. The engineering. condition adverse to quality reporting procedure NFEP-050, " Processing Surveillance _ Reports", requires the identification portion of Surveillance- ' - Report be completed-in one to two days following the -identification of a ' > condition adverse to. quality. The failure to initiate a Surveillance-Report (conditions adverse to quality. report) in accordance with procedure NFEP-050, " Processing Surveillance Reports", is an' example'of a violation (346/85025-03A) of 10:CFR 50,; Appendix B, Criterion V.
~At11605~on' August 11,-1984-the licensee declared the No.-2 CREVS operable , swith.the water-cooled subsystem out of service following maintenance of .the'CREVS..The problem with the water-cooled subsystem was a failed temperature controller which would erroneously place the air-cooled subsystem continuously in service when the CREVS was in use. On May 10, 1985,'the temperature controller was replaced and the water-cooled . subsystem _placed in service.
.The CREVS was declared operable on August 11, 1984, after station
. - management was informed of the situation in accordance with a special ' order which required station management's concurrence on any abnormal ~
,
10 , ,. - - - - -.. - - - - - - - - . - . -
sy' stem lineups. The inspector reviewed the USAR and the licensee's procedures and did not find the.information stated in the architect-engin~eer's' letter. embodied in'any way in the USAR or the procedures. As a result of insufficient information on the design basis, the licensee made an erroneous decision on the operability of the CREVS on August 11, 1984.
Actually, the No. 2 CREVS was inoperable in' excess of the limiting _ condition for operation without compliance with the appropriate action statements of Technical Specification 3.7.6.1.
This situation and the results of the troubleshooting performed by the responsible system engineer are considered an unresolved item (346/85025-04).
-During-the inspection period QC personnel identified a potential problem - with the fire resistant capability of the lubricant used during cable pulling. The concern originated from experience at the Midland Nuclear Power. Plant site.' Following discussions with appropriate NRC personnel, it was determined that.the lubricant was satisfactory for use.
4.
-Action Plan Observation The troubleshooting performed by the licensee on systems which may have contributed to the abnormal behavior of equipment during the June 9, 1985, event-is controlled by detailed troubleshooting action plans and maintenance work orders. The first phase of each action plan included H, detailed inspection and the recorc'ing of as-found conditions. Work then progressed as indicated by the nature of the abnormal behavior and the ' type of' equipment involved. As the work progressed, ongoing results were .noted in detail. -The resident inspectors, with assistance from other Region III inspectors, observed a substantial portion of the work completed during the inspection period.
.During the initial inspection and disassembly of components for each action plan, photographs were taken to record as-found conditions.
Additional photographs were being taken as work progressed to record any additional conditions that may not have been recorded by the initial sets of photographs.
-Most of the troubleshooting controlled by the action plans has been completed and the licensee considers'the root causes identified. The licensee has submitted a summary of the troubleshooting, root cause determinations and the projected corrective actions to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC, for review. The results of the NRC review will be published in a Safety Evaluation Report.
, Listed below are the significant observations made by the inspectors for each action plan: a.
Main feedwater (MFW) pump turbine and controls: The inspector observed the successful operational testing of both MFW pump turbines. The licensee has completed troubleshooting and root cause determination for this equipment.
hd h E. - ' ',, ' _.1 ' ~ ' " - _ , fQg - - '~
' + + , , n , _ , _ lh N N p NNu II ' ^ '" -' N'g y -.
4
- ,-N.'
' ' NI _S l' ^
f s . ...
C.M ~
' * , . , .
- l
- s ' ' c b7 s fAuxiliary'feedwater;(AFW)^ pump turbine and contr$1s:' The: inspector , j
- ^ observed thessuccessful operational testing of the Non2 -AFW pump' 7>4*. + ' - w Lturbiney kThe'licenseelhas completed troubleshooting and root.cause.
- _,' - Mdeterminationjfor(this: equipment.
~ % - ' q.
. The licensee has s, > > > . c tSteam;andifeedweter rupture control system: ; gr - WL - l c.
' E_- , ' (completed troubleshooting and root cause determination for this1 % g, , Lequipmentg, _ Stirthp feedwatericontro1 valve SP7A: /The licensee has completed ~
' ^ - d.)
.C_;. Ltroubleshooting and root cause determination for SP7A.
. , ..w.
. Ee; Source" range. instruments (NI-land.NI-2)iIWhiletroubleshootingthis -- F '. CequipmentitheLlicenseeEnoted that the operation'of'some motor i ' N, ',,, s ' foperated" Safety Features 1 Actuation System isolation: valves' caused- ' A - " - 1small output? spikes. The licensee is continuing to evaluate the
- spiking..Many probless' were found with signal' cable connectors, p ~
t.
Lthese; prob _lems were; corrected during the. troubleshooting' effort to ' M ' idetermine whatieffect they had on instrument' operation.
0ther minor.
ideficiencies were found.
The most significant items are listed below.
' - ?for each channel. !The licensee has completed troubleshooting for ' !this equipment.' )
,... > pp
- (1),NI-1
The!Triax signal: cab 1_e was improperly connected to the.
. ' ' ' ~ 4 signal cable that is attached to the detector;by the: detector s _
. manufacturer. ' The Triax cable was improperly-grounded at its W-e connectwn to the preamplifier.. After. correction of;these.
, f deficiencies the instrument has performed properly.
The
. ilicensee has completed their root cause determination for NI-1.
f , (2)fNI-2: The containment penetration module for the signal cable
" exhibited a"substantially higher resistance than similar h ',,
- penetration modules.
The licensee has.'not determined the' root .~ causelfor the higher resistance.
> d f.
<TErb'inebypass; valve!(TBV)?SP13A2: The' licensee has completed- -troubleshooting and root cause determination for the TBV.
T' , ~ ' J g.' .inspei: tor witnessed testing of 'a PORV. that was mechanically identical ' Power operated relief valve (PORV): On October 18, 1985, the-
- to the'PORV-1.nstalled in the plant but with an AC instead of DC pilot ' solenoid.' The testing was conducted at the Marshall Steam Station in Terrel,'HC.~;During a three-hour period,-the valve was cycled 100 ^
- times in two sets:of 50 consecutive cycles.
Before each cycle, steam -
pressure was approximately 2430 psig.
During each cycle, the valve-was open 5 seconds'.and closed 30 seconds with minor variations.
On - the final ^ cycle, the-PORV:was open 10 seconds, and several times the ' s . ' ~ PORV was closed for more than 30 seconds due to. trips of the teeder M
- breaker for the pilot solenoid. The PORV was tested with saturated
s or high' quality steam and the test lines had been flushed with steam
_ prior to.the-testing.
In service the PORV is subject to more severe ,
. _
s
b o.s ' - - ' [',' Q:1- - 'M p-
, , ~ 3- -, . . )g
W; !: ' - ' < ' . . , %r : ~ ; fluid flowing:through;the.PORV=can:be: expected.to be low, quality
-
conditions. :ThetinJet-lineEis not: flushed priorfto operation andLthe ,3 i.T - - y~ m - steam mixedLwith-borated water.
- > (Duringf.tekting?approximately16000021bs/hr 'at'the Marshall! Steam Station, indi_cated' flow during - ' . ,* i g? each cycle was ... lower than expected mo + , Jandsless thanqthe calculatedJflow determined.during subsequent.- Q-L esting by the valve ' manufacturer. l'The' licensee plans to perform-t ~,
Jadditional flow testing to verify the actual'PORV capacity.
, - .; . Al- ~ '
7 .. ,
- '
<:On: August'26,11985, theilicensee initiated Deviation ReportL85-1361 A ' indicating (thatEthe..PORV-was last. stroke' tested on Septemberjl, 1982,-
- and;that testing required by their,ASME' Code, Inservice Test (IST)
- - . Program? wasinot performed during'either of two' subsequent' refueling .
outagest n,1983~and 1984. The1probleir. was,apparently: caused by! i lindividualsLscheduling the. tests"not-understanding which tests cannot- ' '. . lbe; deferred. 'The problem with PORV testing-has been corrected by- <. Sidentifying the. test asiaErequired surveillance.- '* - -- s , . ,4 ,- . 1 A' review of the failure:to perform testinglindicateslthat while , T ' stroke testing.istpart of the IST Program submitted to NRC fora review,;there is no apparent safety-related requirement in'the-USAR
" tor Technical Specifications for PORV stroke-testing. cA. letter has e
- been:sent to NRR requesting: clarification of requirements for PORV w
' fte' sting at' Davis-Besse.7 The inspector considers' test requirements; J J
- forithe PORV to be an open item.(346/85025-05(DRS)) pending response-
> to this>1etter.
~ ~ . m Theclicensee 1.s1 aware of.the more~generalfproblem of identifying-
- required tests.and is reviewing the list of tests'to1 assure that all- . required testing,is.' unambiguously identifled. : Resolution of the ,
- general problem will: remain an1 unresolved; item (346/85025-06(DRS))
.' . "until the?inspectorican review the licensee's corrective action prior: , ' >
to. plant startup.1 NTheilicensee.has completed troubleshooting'and root cause - " . determination for the PORV.
,.* ~
- h.
LAuxiliary feedwaterrvalves AF:599 and AF 608: The licensee has identified 232 Limitorque, motor-operated valves in.the plant of , ^ lwhich1166 are safety-related. 'These will be tested using MOVATS (as indicated in LER 85-015-00) and required corrective action will be completed prior to" plant,startup.
Instrumented testing of selected-valves at differential pressure ~(dp) conditions'will also be done e - ~ ipriorLto startup.
, , ' '.Duringthe inspection period,. substantial time was devoted to maintenance' training'on the use of.the MOVATS machine, developing ! - . maintenance procedures and reviewing'and approving vendor manuals .used.in.the maintenance' process.
Valve testing prior to these
- activities relied.on.MOVATS Inc. technicians for the required
.y
! - b ... .
y , , ~ , ' ' ~ > , , - , , w .s Q, h.** -% [ _ 6 i p.
" E% F ^ 4, ' ~ -,w c x-
, INS . . s
, , l
, [technicaliskills,and testing ' expertise. fApproximatelyL 90 of the.
Q, - 1661 valves?have been tested;.most ofcthe dp testing remains to_be ~, odone; Many probless'have.been identified and corrected'on the m " p, - . valves tested so far. The licensee's continuing evaluation of y-. ",, n itest results may identify additional corrective actions.
t m .2 , , g
- Drawina' Discrepancies
, 2 ',[ LThhlicenseeiindicated thatia protiles was identified with valve ~ i_
- drawings
- used by Torrey. Pines.in developing torque: switch settings
'~~ for..the ' motor-operated valves. Valves'AF-599-and:AF-608 are examples >
i Lof this,;where calculations made from.the drawings resulted-in a fsetting recommendation of 1.5. (Valve: stem pitch and diameter field > ~1 Eneasurements-differed from the^ drawings"and calculations based on the ~
field measurements indicated that a setting off2.0 should have been ~ ' Lused. ;Dp testing of these valves indicated thatithe' valves would not 'have failed.on: June'9,.1985', if the torque swi.tch had been set at 2.0 > instead'of 1.5.
. , , - 'During:an October 1985' meeting with licensee' engineering staff,:the ^ '
Linspector-determined that the licensee had not. investigated why.. . s
- inaccurate pitch and stem' dimensions for Limitorque operated valves t
.had'been provided to Torrey Pines.as input for-determining torque e4 - ' switch settings. The. inspector informed the>1icensee staff that +' esituations of this type. require submittal ofla report of conditions- > ,, ' : adverse to quality. Approximately a week later, the~ licensee' wrote a ~ %" Conditions' Adverse to' Quality report concerning11naccurate - dimensions.n Procedure NFEP-050,.." Processing Surveillance Reports", ' ! requires the identification portion of a Surveillance Report be -
- completed within one or two' days-of identification of.a condition
' -adverse:to' quality. The initial ~ failure to. initiate'a Conditions - - -
- '
1 Adverse to Quality Report is an example of-violation (346/85025-038) i f 10-CFR'50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
o ' > , [ Closure Capability ', cSome MOVATS test data'shows actual valve stem thrust at the valve ' l sclosure. torque switch trip ~ point'significantly higher or lower than - , 1 expected for_a'given torque ~ switch setting. -While'both conditions ,
. require evaluation, theLlow stem thrust condition appears more _ .significant.since there may:not be enough torque to close the valve , _at design conditions. The licensee stated that required closure "^
' _ ithrust would'be compared to available thrust to assure that adequate . closure thrust-is available for all valves.
This open item < 5'
L(346/85025-07(DRS)) must be completed by the licensee prior to plant , " 'startup.- Post Maintenance'and Surveillance Testina E-Post' maintenance testing.needs to be developed to assure valve _ operability after maintenance activities that can affect valve
- operation. Thistis also'a general requirement of Generic Letter
, ' ,.
- , ,
. " - , . ] -
- vs .,s,. ,., w .- . _. ., . . '/ ' ' i ~:p' c y y: ~ '
~n' ',, h;Xun% R; ;^ ' ! - - . + , ... O inY'.fW
> v., < . ,- u -
- '
s ' n'c s
, , 'h3-28)(whichaddresses;allisafety-relatedequipment). : Development by [29 ~ ' ' 1the?1icensee and subsequent inspector review is. considered an open -
~ T' [ites(346/85025-08(DRS)). ' - . . .. . .Because-no ' technically a'cceptable standards exist in the industry for 'm-' ~, ' / surveillance testing of motor-operated _ valves; sthe inspector ' - " 4 requestedtthat when-MOVATS testing is complete the. licensee consider the following: _ ' IR f(1)' iia 111 safety-related, motor-operatedvalves-shouldbestroketimed-
~ i'6 ' bothiopen ~and closed quarterly',: without' initial L"prestroking", - . by measuring the motor;"on time"' for a' full stroke.
Times should be measured to_+0.5 percent. accuracy, compared to an- . . acceptable baseline and a valve further evaluated when stroke.
' ' -
- ' ',
_
- time varies by;+2._0 percent. ~ The allowed variation of stroke
~ ? time may be' increased'or reduced based'on additional experience- ,.
- and knowledge.
> . ^ ' - (2)iValve motor currentitraces' during valve stroking in' both-open and closed ~ directions!should be recorded at least once every - ~ - [ . f ather. refueling utage and _ evaluated for. abnormalities. _. During _ o ' LthisEstroking,-the valve and operator should be observed for . 'properzoperation'and inspected externa 11yifor general condition.
- (3)_ In-depth test andLevaluation for proper operation (including . x ~"L 1 evaluation of valve' packing-loads, torque switch operation-at ' ' - < proper stem. thrust loads, and limit' switch settings) should be ?done at-least once every_other. refueling outage, alternating ~ 'withfItem (2).. ~ '
- (4): During the conduct ofl item (3),La genera 1' external = inspection of the: valve'and a general internal and' external inspection of valve operator _ mechanical condition -(electrical connections, oil 1eaks,; bolting' rust, packing. leaks, etc.) should be performed.
&
,- - .
~ The: inspector emphasized that items (1) through (4) were sugge nions only,'andLthat the licensee should.begin a program and improve it . t .- ' ~ based on'their~ experience.
The'= licensee understands that current requirements in this area are per the ASME Code, Sectio ~n XI, wh.ich
- providesTonly' minimal assurance of valve operability.
Differential Pressure Testing The licensee:has' tested the open stroke of 4" motor-operated gate . ' valves;AF-599 and AF-608 under dp conditions supplied by a low M capacity hydrostatic test pump.
Testing at several different pressures:showed that the magnitude and duration of high stem thrust requirements increased noticeably with-increasing dp.
Testing.showed_that for an approximately 9.5 second total "on time" -- for the motor 0.-7 seconds passed before stem movement (hammer-blow) occurred; 0.07 seconds passed between stem movement and the beginning , of thrust. loading'on the valve disc;tand, at 1050 psi dp, 1.0-seconds ' ' . ~ _
s , ,
- - y, .m _ m - ~
' , < m '
5'x w Jf ' - y $ybQQ Q l Me
- ,,- -om . x4 . s w, , , s y , < , , y; < , - , ' ^ ~ 'U-L.ofhightorque;coNditionfexiskedduringwithdrawal(ofthediscfrom/ ' ~
> , % 2 J - a zthe valve seat before theitorque dropped _ sharply to the final: valve' vrunning1 condition for;the4 remaining; stroke.T This indicated:that'the: ~ ' * _- . torque switch bypassiswitch contact opening needed to be settwell o- - < -
fy;perce;thevalve. stroke.LThe;1icenseesetcontact,openingat;20- _ into
%,,"1 1 - ntJof; disc travel after!the beginningLof. disc movement Y ' f y[ ' h' 'Duetiailin'itehdatabaseinthis' area:andWneedformore'. . ' ~ ' ' - (meaningful Ltesting f under 'dp conditions,. the licensee willistrokeitest D ' , ' ' Ltwenty valves' under dp conditions while ' monitoring' valve conditionsf - -r ' ' (with MOVATS. _ Completion and review of: this) testing is: considered an 'A
_ Jopen*itami(346/85025-09(DRS)). ' >
- !The licensee has completed; troubleshooting:and root cause:
' "}g.
j [ determination for_this: equipment.
[i.
BSteam line press'urefdiscrepancies: :During full flow steam testing of x i '
s ~
- the
- eightilowest;setpoint main steam safety valves (MSSV)~ seven did
,
- - not ~meetitest ' acceptance criteria due to minor leakage and blowdown z ' an " ~ ideviations..-The MSSVs that; failed were rebuilt by the manufacturer < The remaining-ten.MSSVs~were rebuilt by the manufacturer at the site.
- The
- licensee-determined that:the Rapid Feedwater:(FW) Reduction'.
. >. ifeature 'of the Integrated _Controi System had been: allowing a-startup_.
t '
- FW control valve to supply too_much FW to the No.:2 steam generator!
. . u, ' lThe: licensee has_not yet completed troubleshooting and root cause:.
a '
- ,
', :. determination'for:this equipment.
s - % _ M JService; water' valve controls forfauxiliary feedwater supply: The- ' ' , clicenseeLhas completed' troubleshooting and root cause determination ,, for:this equipment.
- ' kr' Valve'MS 106: [Theactivitiesrela; ! to this valve are the same.
' . The icensee has completed.
tas!Lreported for itemih.~_above.
t ,. ltrout 1eshooting.and root ~ cause determination for this valve.
! > , ! 5.- TMI Action It' ens ^ '(Closed)' Item II.F.1.5 Wide _RangeLContainment:(CTMT) Pressure: The yinspectorJreviewed Surveillance Test ST:5041.01.6, " Containment Vessel n
- Normal: Sump. Level,and Flow Monitoring System Channel Calibration" and
'5' . 'ST 5036.'01.6,s" Remote Shutdown,-Post Accident Monitoring Instrumentation.
- (Monthly Channel ' Check",' for proper implementation of Technical l Specification-(TS) 4.3.3.6; Table 4.3-10, instrument item 33, -" Containment Wide. Range Pressure". :The procedures fully meet the intent-of:TS 4.3.3.6,and TS definitions for Channel Calibration (1.9) and ~ ~
- Channel. Check -(1.10). - Each procedure has adequate acceptance criteria.
-. ., EVerification of past calibration records'show thesinstruments are
~ icalibrated'over their' full range'and'are'in the_ Davis-Besse quality (Q) ' -
- program'.
Loop. diagrams:J-105, Sheet 1, Rev. O,~"CTMT Pressure (PT-A587) ' WidesRange Ch.71"., and J-105,' Sheet 2, Rev. 0,."CTMT< Pressure (PT-4588) . Wide ' Range Ch. 2", were reviewed by the inspector and were.found current.
Each print wasistamped Q and-adequately depicted the pressure channel.
.s , ,
, . , , , a
-- g (- ' :Jm - ~ f'
- . NyLi " u e s wm y, y,s + , " ~' ' ' . : ~ ... a ,, ' yg , F- ' '
, _ r' , . ;,/ [ysvM - I6; ? Licensee" Event: Reports Followup - t ~,, ., ' y ' < < > a , , , , iThrough(direct, observations,5 discussions Mitblicensee = personnel and j ^ m ' _. freviewlof1recordsL the following' event reports. ware reviewed to' determine '-i 1'@' (that:reportability requirements-were fulfilled, immediate correctiveu. ' - - Jaction.was! accomplished,and. corrective action to: prevent recurrence had ~.been accomplished'.in'accordance with technical ' specifications.
-. - , % .:(Closed)?80i91,L; Revision 0.throughRevision14,E0verstressedmasonrywalls.
, . (Closed)L82-40,' Failure of 4!16kv breaker; for No. 3.CCW pump to close.1 - - j(Closed) 82-51'andjRevision'1,' Steam and Feedwater; Rupture Control System ' _
- powerisupply failure.=
~ ' (Closed) 83-27,10verspeed trip of emergency diesel generator:(EDG) during ' (surveillance testing. 'The; inspector determined that one.long ters:. ~ , Lcorrective action has.not been accomplished. xThat actinn-is:the issuance of;a maintenance procedure for EDG governor. installation'and adjustment.
, > This11s considered.an open item-(346/85025-10).
During followup on the . 1 corrective action: establishing:a 2 year preventative maintenance-- . calibration program.for the!EDG tachometer, thetinspector noted.that.the ' < . ~ - itachometer:was not! scheduled for calibration until December 1987.
' ' Further< review revealed th'at the11ast calibration took place as.the,. ~ ' ~ , , Eresult'ofJthis LER-in'1983.
Discussion with licensee personnel revealed- - - ,
- that. thel 1983 calibration = maintenance. work order (MWO) had been voided in-mf _ &
(1983;for an. undetermined reason and a new MWO was generated a few days.
% - , <later'under which the tachometer was-actually' calibrated in 1983.
!However,ithe schedul.ing computer: recorded the second MWO as the .
- preventive maintenance : required'in 1985 and-scheduled-the next preventive tMWO'in.1987..The inspector's discussion with scheduling personnel
~ ? revealed-that(this situation could~ happen 1again with-the computerized J' system:now in use. The' inspector discussed the potential scheduling +. probleetwith the1 Planning Superintendent. 1The' action required to prevent-
- a repetition of improper scheduling
- is considered an open item 1(346/85025-11).
' ' L(Closed) 83-50,RSurveillance test on decay heat removal system relief.
, . valve was not. performed. During theLreview of the licensee's corre~ctive '
- action,ethe inspector, determined that the original corrective action for this LER.was to discourage issuing temporary modifications (T-mods)-to data sheets and to place a sign on the control room procedures cabinet
,
- whenever one:was issued.
The inspector determined that the placing ~of - 'the sign on the cabinet has'been superseded-by the practice of' attaching ~ . data sheet T-mods to the modified data-sheet instead ~of the front of the . ~ procedure.
' , -(Closed) 84-06,-Pressurizer spray bypass valve leakage causing plant , - shutdown.
, J, (Closed):84-13 and Revision 1, Reactor trip due to turbine trip due to , inadvertent actuation of moisture separator reheater high water level Lswitch. ;The-inspector determined that one long term corrective action , n
17 t ., - - --,,-.i.m $,.., wh_-,-A J-...~..i.m..,._...._,. ...myyr.m_,__,,e m.,,, ,,__m_,_w.
'
= yw, y . .. - , _ _ , - .; j r : n - ~
- remains to be performed..Thataction;isjimplementation;ofFacility.. '
- Change Request 85-083 to install redundant: moisture separator reheater - =a~
- high levelfswitchesE 1Thistis considered'an open. item (346/85025-12).
. . A ' - ! ' - {{ Closed)'84-14NExcessivecontainmentleakagedeterminedduringlocal ' leak rate testing.
The inspector determined that:two longl term A corrective actions' remain-to be performed.
The fi.rst is the determination'~of what: type of: facility change request (FCR) must bel - '
- implemented.to; assure l extended = operability of valve SA2010.
This is- ? considered anLopen item (346/85025-13).. The'second is the implementation ~ ' ' Lof.FCR'83-093, Rev.l B to modify the Technical Specifications for , 4 containment 1 isolation-valves.
The request for license modification was- ' Leade-.in 1984'and has yet to be acted upon. oThis is considered an open . ~ fitem (346/85025-14).
u
. . ~ A ~, _ 1(Closed)l84-16, Emergency ventilation system. testing inadequacies.
1(Closed) 84-19, CCW surge: tank relief valve discharge piping blank' , flanged.
- L(Closed)L85-01,1(Atmosphericventvalve(ICS11Aand-11B). testing ' ~
- inadequacies. Testing of ICS 11A and 11B was added to'the surveillance f
test computer program. ' A new' procedure,EST-5064.02, " Atmospheric Vent.- ' , . Valve-Operability Test",'was issued on May 21, 1985. - The procedure.for' e' - calculating'ICS llA and 11B overall time response'to_the Safety Features ' - Actuation System'(SFAS),'ST 5031.06, has'not-been changed to identify ST 5064.02 P
- asfan input to the time response calculations.
The inspector informed the licensee:of.this situation on October 14,'1985.
This will remain an openLitem until ST-5031.06?is. revised (346/85025-15).
~ 'x (Closed) 85-03,~SFAS' level No. 1 actuation.
The-inspector verified that ~ < ithe'.SFAS radiation meter was repaired under Maintenance Work Order- - 'l-85-0391-00.
Through discussion ~with modification personnel, the inspector ascertained that two of the four radiation meters have been ' rho 2 mounted under Facility Change; Request (FCR) 85-042.
The LER is c./La.d but complete-implementation of'FCR 85-042 is considered an open > , 1 item (34785025-16).- " ' ~ -(Closed) 85-04, Containment isolation valve RC229A exceeded stroke time during_ surveillance testing.
- (Closed) 85-05, Reactor trip from 28% power. The inspector verified through-record review that the controller:in the steam generator (SC)
g level control circuit was repaired. The inspector reviewed PP1102.10,
- '! Power Operations", and found no mention of placing the main feedwater-pump in manual r ior to reaching.SG: low level limits.' This was discussed-
. , Lwith the-operatwns staff'and 'an acceptable revision to PP1102.10 was ' . issued.
~ ' S-(C1hsed) 85-07i,- Auxiliary Fhedwat'er (AFW) P' ump turbine response time .probl. ems.] The inspector reviewed the corrective actions'except those associated with AFW I{ ping damage. The inspector determined that all corrective act'ons had been accomplished except that only the , ! . -
,s ? -w-t-k 4---y . e-= w-
fy ' ' p i . [1 _ ' ' ~ ^ y ~; ' V,- - . ' _. T . . ' ' - , , < ,
- s'rveillance test was1 modified to. slowly. admit'-steam to the AFW pump from d
u
's ithe' auxiliary boiler:to preclude a water hammer.. The-inspector requested _ 'that~ section 6 ?Nanual: and ~ Abnormal Operations "of.the AFWS",' of . W . "SP1106.06 " Auxiliary?Feedwater System" be reviewed to determine if . - ~ -additional: guidance should be included regarding a potential. water-
- hammer. ?This vis considered:an' open item"(346/35025-17).
The licensee ' stated that the:LER willLbe revised to include the hanger damage - experienced. ~The hanger damage and the subsequent corrective; actions are the subject;of Confirmatory Action; Letters 85-03 and 85-13. Monitoring . - tof these corrective actions-will be. performed under these letters.
' (Closed)'85-08; Exceeding'the' reactor power limit established due to low ' measured reactor coolant flow.
- 1(Closed):85-09,. Reactor. trip on Flux / delta flux / flow.
. (Closed)-85-10, Safety features actuation system level No. 1 actuation.
- _ , (Closed) 85-11, Turbine and reactor-trip.during turbine control valve ' H ctesting.
~ -
- (Closed);85-12, Auxiliary feedwater. control room panel indicator wiring
.e error.
[(Closed)l85-14,lInoperable fire door No. 318.
< 1.
- (0 pen)l85-17, Overpressurization of the No. 1 steam generator (SG) on the Lsecondary side. -During', testing of..the No. - 1-auxiliary feedwater -(AFW)' pump non September 6,1985, the discharge valve to the No.1-SG, AF3870, was not'
~~g fully closed. When the AFW pump'was started, No. 1 SG was pressurized to- ' 1AFW pump discharge pressure, just~below the main' steam safety valve lowest- ' . setpoint of-1050 psig.' When'the pressure exceeded 237 psig, the licensee W Lunintentionally. entered the. Technical Specification'(TS) action statement ' of limiting condition.for operation'(LCO) 3.7.2.1.
This action' statement Tre' quires pressure-to;be reduced to:less than 237 psig within 30 minutes 'and performance'of=an engineering evaluation on the structural integrity n of the SG prior to repressurizing-it above 237 psig.
Pressure was reduced below 237 psig after about 28 minutes'when the licensee could not , _ determine why the Steam and Feedwater Line Rupture Control' System (SFRCS) - , c_ -was actuating on low pressure., The, licensee then concluded that the "' . .SFRCS was malfunctioning.
In reality,:the first' pressurization had ~ leared the SFRCS low pressure blocks at 650 psig and when pressure c o . dropped below 600.psig,'SFRCS actuated as designed.
Instrument and Jcontrol: personnel were called to' observe the SFRCS, and AFW pump testing /res'uned.j 0nce again,Lthe No. 1 SG was pressurized'above 237 psig. When the . 'SG wasirepressurized the~LCO 3:7'2l1 action statement was exceeded since ' , . - .an engineering evaluation had not been performed for the first . -pressurization above 237 psig.
Approximately 12 minutes into the second pressurization, the licensee became aware of-SG pressure and testing was ' stopped.
A review of the valve lineup for the testing revealed that- ~ 'AF3870 had.been designated as closed.
Furthermore, AF3870 had been L . tagged closed and checked closed before the test began.
However, AF3870 - i , 19 - p n t
ws**& -T. x - - n ' ,
- _ fqt- ~ l _ ' . , c ,r I
[had notibeen positively verified closed 'on either occasion.
Discussion.
'with the licensee. revealed.that--there had not been uniformity in
',m LoperatorsE training in tagging ~ valves.- Scae. personnel were not fully , l aware'offthe" necessity to turn the handwheel until a hard stop is felt to- - ' . ' S' a assure'a valveLis closed. Also,'there has uncertainty:about how much' ' force"could be exerted on a handwheel without damaging the valve.
Nevertheless,(the inspector concluded that the root cause of this ' ' situation was;a' personnel' error.
Exceeding the action statement > associated with a limiting condition for operation-is a violation of- , - % . 1T.S.<3.7.7.11(346/85025-18).
- ! LAlso,=;duringthefinspectionpericd,LERs81-35,182-28,E 82-39,.83-09, - L83-20783-29, 83-32, 83-36 and.G3-38 were reviewed to determine what--
- actions' the
- licensee had taken. The' inspector had informed the licensee
.'. /gt ~ (that;these LERs1needed irevisions to properly. state _ the corrective actions : -.taken.
No action had been taken by the licensee.. The Deviation Reports-
Q ,(DVR) associated with:thesa LERs had been closed based upon initiation of d" "
a study or an FCR. ;In scae cases the.results of a study was not
- documented since the DVP. was already closed.- In'other cases FCRs had not
~ been implemented ~and~ned corrective actions had not-been designated since ' (theLDVR was already closed.' In-the licensee's system once a DVR is - . closed there~is no me:hed for updating the LER.
The inspector requested ~ - thellicensee_' assure aggressive followup in epdating'LERs.
The inspector _ - -will~ monitor the licensee's' initiatives to improve the DVR/LER system as _ an opentitem (346/85025-19).
, , 17.
Monthly Maintenance Observation-Station l maintenance' activities of safety related systems and components clisted below were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted ~ in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory guides and industry codes.or standards and in conformance with technical' specifications.
The following-items were-considered during this review: the limiting ' , conditions for. operation lwere met.while: components or systems were . -
- removed from service; approvals were obtained prior;to initiating the'
'
- work; activities.were accomplished using approved procedures and were
Linspected'as applicable;: functional. testing ~and/or. calibrations were l performed. prior. to returning 'componentsior, systems to' service; quality control; records were maintained; activities'were accomplished by qualified personnel; parts and materials used%ere properly certified; radiological controls.were implemented; and, fire prevention controls were; implemented.
'
' Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to.' assure that. priority is assigned to' safety related equipment ' l maintenance'which may affect system performance.
. _The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed: a.
Replacement of. Steam and Feedwater Rupture Control System (SFRCS) ~ relay driver board.
o i'
, - d l ,.r.
-., .... :; -. - ,L._.n-,. i,..._,._ ,--_,___,,,,,,,.n--,-,-_-__,---,,...t
' ~ ~ ~ ~ y, 4:/[jg 3; , x ... ,, . C*s w% ' _1 - w, , -y - m _,, - , .. y, ; p g,.= .N ~ .. j "
m x41 + 1.
g
- ~
_ -; , c 1 W $ $ $^ 'l.,,. [ _, 1, g.p , _
- _
m 'Mf JWhilefobserving~ Inst'rument;andControl'(I&C)mechanicsreplacethe.
- -b
.SFRCS?annunciatcy relay. driver board the inspector noted that the new-44 ~ " . Lboard was improperly: removed from 'a pisstic shipping bag ' labeled with '
%i g warnings':about;staticjcharge.;{The inspector-determined that:I'&'C ?- fpm ' " mechanics,:'the cognizant 1 engineer and Quality Control /(QC) personnel - ,- ^ l #l , didinot-have formal training-on handling'electronicidevices sensitive ~ .to' damage.by static [ charge. ;In addition, there was no area in'the I ,' 1.&'C-' shop'.or. warehouse for working-on and receipt. inspecting'these- . . , , , idevices._JThe? inspector discussed the following aspects of static
' sensitive devices with the I &;C superintendent?and QC: -- ~ ,x.
y. T ~ h .2 ((1)yTraining'of?I&'Cmechanics,-QC, Quality"Engineeringand _ warehouse personnel.
' y, c ._- . . < b _ T(2)h Safe receipt, handling-and~ repair instructions.
' s. The needJfor;staticisensitive device work: stations.
.(3) - .. ,.. , ,.. . . e m , ~ - c3 . . .. ', x: . L(4) :Developme_nt'oftinstallation and removal pract' ices for circuit s,, ' ' boards,in'the plant.
" ? , - _ lTheiimplementation'ofanappropEiateprogramforhandling'ofstatic ' sensitive devicesiisfan open-item (346/85025-20(DRS)).- ' - , . fi.. . , ' ' . i b.. :SFRCSpSwitchWiringVerification."
V ' - . ~ . " .iWhilefobservingtheSFRCSswitchwiringverificationtheinspectorL Tnoted-thct3ection.6.12, " Continuity Testing", of maintenance.
. - jroced_ureMP-1410.33.5,r"MeggerandContinuityTestingofElectrical- ,.
- Equipment",.does~not
- address switches. The inspector requested that-j
, -the licensee review MP 1410.33.5 and assure that there are ' ~ appropriateirequirements for documentation'of continuity.and post = ?w "maintenancetesting:for_'switchesthathavejbeen' moved,repairedor , M,. replaced.
_ ,,
p" ' , , SourceRangeNdlearInstfumentation(SRNI)containmentpenetration - c.
' Hmodule replacement.
' V
n , . . .. .. > .T Ld. 9 Installation offa.recorderffor SRNI: signal, g' - ' w , < _ fe,- Component Cooling WaterVpump_ shaft alignment.
K . . _During the performance of ST 5074.011 vibration, measurements are ' ' ' ' ' . . 3' .
, ., - , 'taken;using procedure MC 7005.01, " Vibration _ Monitoring". 'The.
_
- ,
' ' inspector noted.that MC 7005.01-had not been reviewed by the Station _ Review' Board and' approved for use on Nuclear Safety Related (NSR) ~ - '" ' . equi;inenti,The mechanical foreman was notified and the procedure was . withdrawn from.the work package'. ' Approval of MC 7005.'01 for use on ~ - - '. a' MNSRLaquipment'will:be tracked as an open item (346/85025-21).
,
+ .- ., _.. ,, Lf;v Replacement 1of indicatorJlight sockets in the. AFW ' Pump Room and at the Auxiliary Shutdown Panel.
~ ' s j L} J>3 . ' m , " ' a 21' t . L , " < 'g g ' $ - u...,, ... .u.- e.. L . .. ...e' , . n
gp - - 3- - -
- c
- - _; - ,
, , pp ' ;_ A- , ,
," [,,,
,gy- - : , , l..v Y I? k - @'N fDdring'thelreplacementlactivity_the:new' socket's were found to be1 .' ' ~ , ~ ' *'. olarger than:the' sockets they were to. replace. 1The electricians ! stopped work'and: notified :thef engineersin_ charge. Work will? continue -,y
-,,m f after-resolution and documentation of the, problem has been completed.
- i g.
LLal'ibration sf a steam; generator. pressure sensor.: ' _ LThe; inspector' obs'erved portionsLof:the-string calibration.of pressure < - &{. E c hannel,JPT-SP12A1,' steam generator. outlet pressure lo'op two; ~ The - c w
- pressure string is.partfof the Integrated Control System and is a
- - zqualityJ1evel:Q311tes..xThe inspector determined ~that.this= pressure.
q - W ' . string provides an input to the manualisecondary heat-balance.
,- M * 3;; calculation. The: control room instrument: string section was.
"
- performed.'by non-Davis-Besse personnel.x No
- procedurefwas available;
. (to perform the calibration.'JThe string data sheet,. controlled ~ ' . '1 Edrawing 'and Mk'0 were -provided to the: instrument mechanics. SThe data $ sheet;had no acceptance criteria values stated ~and~no instructions 6, 'were provided to helpiselect. proper measuring ~and test' equipment-
((MTE).
'
- v.,
. .
- Calibration'offthe transmitter was completed last..The range'and
- iaccuracy of-the: transmitter is 0. to -1200 psig, +6.0.. The MTE ' ' 1 selected to perform the calibration was a 0 to 1500.psig, +7.5', 7, 1p,'ressure gauge.: The MTE did:not meet the accuracy requirement _of-
- the transmitter. The cal.ibration was stopped by a Dav.is-Besse
. tjourneyman who.was assisting in the. transmitter portion.
- " ' oThe1 performance:of..a calibration without a procedure is contrary. to ' . - c ,,:TSi6.8.lia which~ endorses-RG 1.-33,~-November.1972, Appendix A and is' ., considered.a violation (346/85025-22(DRS)). ' Lh.
{ Repair-of' Essential-Inverter)YV-1.
' ~ (Thetechnicians:wereunabletocompletework'onthe'inverterbecause V, 1 ,~ step 6.6;2fof procedure MP :1410.70,i" Periodic Maintenance,~ 120VAC ' ' J nstrument~ System,- Inverters and. Transformers", required an ' I '= > adjustment.oflthe inverter.Joutput voltage if;it was.out_of tolerance.
, TheLvoltage was'out,offtolerance,.but the; procedure did not include .
< ^ " instructions?on howLthe[ adjustment was to be made<and!was ~ unclear ',6' )about-what: voltmeter wastto be used during the. adjustment.
The technicians stopped work.until a temporary modification could be , N.made to the~ procedure to; include adequate instructions.
, 8'.^ Regional' Requests- . ,
- 0n _ August:15,'1984, the 511censee submitted a relief request on 10 CFR 50
. cAppendix J testing of va1ves~DH11 and DH12. The NRC review determined ~ , that.the. relief-request was unnecessary but that a pressure test of.the "" . piping associated with DH11/12 outside.~of the containment building was ,, warranted.. ^In a letter.from.TED NRR,-on April 15, 1985, the licensee '
committed to visually inspect the piping in question and measure any , , u -
- significant leakage.' Regional management requested the inspector verify that this inspection had been incorporated into the licensee's
, >
e ' , l [_i, ' ' _ g' . ,
y .,. > n.
' ,- J f
- procedures'.-. The; inspector verified that' procedure ST5051.03, " Low..
- Pressure-Injection and Containment Spray Systems. Leak Rate-Test", had been modffied to include this inspecti_on.
c , "y, ' 9.: Management' Tours- _ ' L On September 9,:1985, the inspector accompanied Mr. James Keppler,- Region ' . III Administrator, and Mr.; Harold Denton, Director of the Office of , , (Nuclear. Reactor; Regulation, on a' tour of. the _ facility.
- . y- . Y l 10.
Interim Performance Enhan' cement Program (IPEP)
J.
- _ E.
On' November 4,1983, during a'special announced meeting at the " . W 4' Davis-Besse site, at'the request.of NRC Region III, the licensee agreed ',,. Ltoismbark'on a. Regulatory Improvement Program (RIP). On' December 23,f 1> 1983,-the ;1icensee-presented-the conceptual framework.of the RIP.
During ' ^ - )the'meeti'ng'Ethe NRC requested.a reportLof-the-interim corrective actions- - , to-.be taken by the: licensee in the' areas identified as deficient by the ' LRIP. ;0n February 2, 1984,"the licensee' presented the interim corrective - < ' c actions then in place and those for future completion.c These - fcorrective actions composedcIPEP. -The ters' Performance Enhancement . , Program ~(PEP)Lis the licensee's designation for the RIP.
1.
,,- , y'~ - 'IPEP encompassed.15' distant areas within the company and comprised 159 ' ' ,
- associated actions.
The licensee assigned numbers from 1 to 17 (3 and 15 , ?5 !were not used);to designate individual = action areas..In section II.B.2 of ' -
theLlicensee's response ~to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter of August 14, 1985, , 16lIPEP^acti.onstwere: reported as not completed.;The inspector. performed: ' . a! complete' review of'12:IPEP~ areas'and:a partial review of 2 areas.
The- ~ Lactions..to'be inspected in the' future are associated with' acquisition of D L '. ' '
- design-bases
- information,4 6-1(1-9); maintenance, 07-1(1-13); drawing
O . : control),t 12-1(1-18),;and vendor manual control,12-5(1-3)...Theresultsof'b that: review are! presented below: % .n 1 J.
. g[ ( ' (NOTE:- The1RP-XXXXX designator is a special tracking. number. assigned by.
- . .the inspector to' track licensee corrective actions associated.with the DIPEP! PEP and the1SALP IVsreport. Numbers!beginning with'01 through 17' . iidentify an:IPEP action. ; Numbers beginning with 88 identify a PEP a'ction: < ' 3not=specifically committed to in the SALP IV response.. Numbers _beginning "J ^ , with 99 identify?a SALP-response' action.. The RY-XXXXX designatorLis a ' , . LspeciEl tracking n' umber assigned by(the inspector;to track the licensee's
- - "
s , , (commitments stated.in the-licensee's September 9, 1985, response to the
V' '10 CFR 50.54(f) letter of August?14, 1985.
[ @m , ..~ Area.Noki-Methodo1'ogyofManagement~ ' < ' Codductanassessmentof'theimplementationof~ ,i' ' [01-2(01) Commitment: ~ Management by Objectives (MBO) on the Nuclear ' , - ,
- - Mission ' ' Status $ The assessment was conducted by personnel outside , s.
- ",N~
the Nuclear Mission by a series of interviews ag
_v,
withj41 supervisory personnel.; The review . . ' o g , , -- !k ,.f?; f
Og _ T ' , w y , .y -- > . , _
. . _ .. _.
_. - _ _ _.. . ._ .. g->@ , _ ., ' - . W - q , + - , - .j ,, , , _ C; ) { l + , ' - ~, - ' +
7- ~ ' Ldetermined that the MB0'philosophyLwas supported ~ ' i _f '~:s
' by management'but was not being-implemented
' , properly. L Recommendations were made to.better- ' - , - define:the 20 programi train management in
- -
' , ' ~ ' the use of 20 and assure _ proper management . ~ ,
- resources are committed.to make'.the MBO process
? . ' ' 2 ' %. ~ viable. The recommendations:were-incorporated' -
into a report' issued on May 16, 1984.- Which was-f '
, ~used in~; conjunction with other inputs in the . . & _ ',- s , development of_ PEP implementation plans A-2,.
, '" Integrated Approach to Goals',' Objectives and q.
" ' ' < + .
E,, - -
- Strategic Planning" and E/SP-9p" Maintenance MB0".
- s ' N-S.
-This IPEP action ~(RP-01021).is closed.- '
... . .. ,.. .., .. ... . _, &," ' 01-2(02)~ Commitment:1 Establish a realistic schedule for definition and ~. 4- ,/- limplementation'of.the Section Head Objectives , ,- - ,. Program.'
~ ' U ,' ' ' Status-
- After completion of action.01-2(01), a completion
- ydate of-June 1, 1984, was established for.this w.
, , ,' , ' ' 1. action. LDue to'other management considerations, ' ~ i@d .e - .- -
- 6 et Y, r onlyltwo sectionLheads;were; involved in this
~ - V2 3: 4 7 program by the: scheduled completion date.
- Completion'of'this action was rescheduled to
- y. <
> cearly 1985. 'Due to this'long time duration, the < . , " ^ y' p g y ( s . action was added;toiPEP. implementation plan A-2, - : - -
' ."P " Integrated Approach to' Goals, Objectives and t^
, " " ~ ^ . Strategic' Planning".7~ This:IPEP' action (RP-01022)- _, y( is closed.
- _,r, .. ~ - ? ; Area.No.123-Staffing.
'- . % ~. .... Commitment: iReview and comment on the basis for identifying - . J ' 502-1(01)--. ~ ' .
,, _~ allowableistaffing levels.
i - , Status:- 50nMarch 21/1984, the Vice-President (VP), % . - .
Nuclear issued a. memo-stating the corporate- -(,, , ' , ' s _ ? philosophy on allowable' staffing levels. This - t . - IPEP: action'(RP-02011) is closed.- ~ ~; - ' ( - 'l021(02')) Commitment: Develop projections-of '!new" and additional ,M < V: 4> '
- capabilities that will be required to support
< operation'of Davis-Besse over the next 3-5 years 2 N '.v sg ~ -(by organizational' units).
, - > . .
- Staffing projections were performed and presented Status:
.. . '~ ~ ' - ' ^ ito the'VP, NuclearTon October 19, 1984.
Since %*) s . - n e' that reportnsignificant management changes have , occurred.~ This has'resulted in a projected 231 ' ' , fxm Jperson; increase in staffing-levels-by 1987.
This
,, ' + , . supersedes the October staffing projections and h[.b N ~ ' ., ,' s ,
- f, l,
' , Tu u et . , . , , , h -? " , 's x _ .- u m,, . . . 7- - b i ,.. [. ',r.
= x.
.... - .-, u.- - ,.. -- - ,, _ _., - ~
' ' Q' ~f,
- F
- r . . .- .
.c ' , ,A? , &,, [] y ,.* 7, s .:.
- s
',. ; ;r . , , z ;, -
% . $; < - ' ' extends 1the time for acquiring those per:.onnel.
' , %m -'
- Acquisition of'the new personnel will.be
- - monitored'as RY-04000 - This-IPEP action " ' J/ .. , (RP-02012);is closed.
> , 021l03)I2 Commitment: IIdentify' organizational'unitswherestaffinglevels
,- T '. . , tand/or capabilities represent;high risk exposure.
'; ~ ' to.the licensee;-' identify and; implement-immediate , J'- E ' actions'to support these areas.
. ' ' _ ' +
e, . '* - - to the licensee were, identified under the ~. ' ' prioritization actions-of:02-1(05).
Specific-W* - + critical: areas were training and licensing. On , f_' ' March 21, 1984, the VP, Nuclear.provided a prioritized list' of at.thorized vacancies'totthe w .VPL Administrative: Services.. A follow-up meeting . , . _.x y,,4, -
- on June 15, 1984, resulted.:in the formation of a -
, i.
. Recruiting Task Force.
The' task force. includes . ~ key ean.agement personnel from both organizations- ~ ~ J ,# ,% =- and is a significant.forcelin directing the hiring.
'" Ii effort.
Future effectiveness of-the task force! . - Lwill be monitored as RY-04000. 1This IPEP: action ' -
~ '(RP-02013) is closed.
' l02-l(04) icommitment: ' Implement nuclear mission position upgrades and-
/~" . salary adjustments as a result of.the position: ' ~re-evaluation' study.
m .. z - iStatus: I Posi tio'n : sal ary : adjustments i accompli shed on March x-n g z 1,-1984,'did not: achieve the desired overall:
w . result of making the: licensee competitive with'.
- ; ~ , sthe nuclear industry.
Further actions associated ,, , -with salary adjustments are the' subject of PEP - ,
- implementation plan B-2,7"ignifica'nt management Salary Administrative
', = , LPlan ; Also, following s ' ' a .. . .,f - .' - changes-in the= summer of 1985,-new initiatives are being taken to accomplish this task.
In ip - , '
3 ,t <section II.A"of:the response to the 10'CFR 50.54(f)
- '.~
- 3
~~ 11etter,-th'e licenseeEcommitted to provide ^ - ~ ' > J ' , - competitive compensation for personnel. The new > i initiatives will' be monitored as -RP-88006.
This- ,, ~" eNF _ IPEP! action (RP-02014) is closed.
yA i Es -[,- 'l02-1(05): Commitment: Prioritize filling of open authorized position'- J /' w:;
- vacancies.
' ' ' ... '^ Qp , c fMf ~ ', TStatus:' In March, 1984,.the VP, Nuclear instructed the
i division directors to identify and prioritize .h - personnel needs in their organizations. The mw - prioritized list was submitted to the VP, ' . . - .m f[ i l I , ,q m,' ' , h .@ s , > " g-4' ., ' ' ~ -
~ & .g -'.n b,
. ,
- ^
<:% e lf' - , s
/* R.. *
=. - - . . ~, - , , , , s.
- - < mZ { ., k ? , _ A
,
~ . . s . o - ..
- Administ'ative Services who.was in charge of l'
' r ?o- .. .the-personnel department. LThis list was later-
- used.by the Recruiting Task Forcelto identify-
,.N ' , ' t Ewhere the':most intensive' recruiting efforts-P >should be: applied.
This IPEP action.(RP-02015) '
, - > jisfclosed.-
. t02-1'(06)LCommitment: iImplement annuaFnuclear mission position.: - - ' ' , . < ,. .,... g .
' cevaluations; - ^^ , , r^ ' 'm , a sa- . ~... . ,the VP, Nuclear requested the- < . % Status: '0n April 26, 1984, '~ s . .VP,uAdministrative Services to implement: annual , position evaluations. LBased on discussions with e _ , , . the personnel department, this request was acted , _. .upon and:is currently being performed. cThis~IPEP - < l action-(RP-02016).is' closed.
. .: - ... .. . , -
- 02-1(07) ; Commitment: ..;TheBoard?of-Directorsapprovedadditionof59 a ' < '
' - Lpersonnel to.theKnuclear mission in 1984; this~is - ' ? in additio'n to.25 remaining'1983 authorizations.
. >2
" '
_ rStatus: 't1 This commitment"has been' superseded by.the; - y7 : C E Jcommitment;in'section II.B.170f the response to ' -
- -the'10 CFR 50.54(f).1'etter to> add 231' people by 1987.
The acquisition.of the new personne1~will o . ' . C.
f7 ~ is; closed.
- , ' '~ ' ^ ibejmonitorediasxRY-04000 and?IPEP action.(RP-02017) ~ , n ' Ra ;g- .s -- . r - m r , ,, , _ [02-1(08) -Commitment: .A significant~ number of contractor. personnel are +? ~being utilized to supplement the-nuclear mission .. . , _ - . work force"until full-time Toledo-Edison employees "' - can beLhired.- ~ < . e _. , . _. . . ..
_ ' Status:- This~.IPEP. action was. included in PEP implementation ~ plan A-1,i"Guideliries for the Use of Consultants".
. > f - ThisfIPEP"a'ction (RP-02018).is closed.
& -
. i i Position Qualifications for the Senior s ( ~ "m ' .Ar.eaL o.13;,0rgan zat on and N Statf x ' iThe~reviewI:inthis: area-concludedthatnointErimactionswerenecessary.
' 'f a ur EArea'No.f'fManagementOversight '7, -
jq, M ~ " ' visits to the plant by the VP, Nuclear and- ' _ J .,9; . division directors.-
,, ' ,
- ! Status: Initial implementation of the' site visits was not
~ "
- , p "
' uniform.
By late 1984, periodic visits were i ' ' being performed. :The new management team 'h ' ' ' C ' ' > established in the summer.of 1985 reemphasiz/d ..- w - , 4_ ., -
' ~ . -26 ~ 39 , _ _~L.-. .. "* , - , . ,- s
g :- r y; - " , - . ~ %.
' , " . ' . , v,, - . , ,,e.
.- . - - ,' s . ? ' .A; . ,, _ _ ithe'need for weekly; site visits'in-a~ September 16,. , ' 1985,' memorandum.fros'the VP,. Nuclear to the: ' - , ' A Jdivision directors. This_IPEP action (RP-04011):
' .,.'. % - < ~ .is closed and' performance!of site visitsLunder _ ,'the new corporate leadership will,be monitored as a- - s> .
- > ,, - . Tr
- RP-99012.
- }3 . . .$, W LAreaNo'.15:-/ Safety. Management - , , '
n. . - < , . . . '.'
- 05-1(01) CCommitaent
- ..
- Implement practice wheretiy Nuclear Facility.
s m Mw~ -Engineering personnel on Davis-Besse plant site p.,'. ~ S ~and at Edison Plaza use~the same procedure SS7 %, , -(NEI-334):to perform safety evaluations.
,. - ' s ... . In:1984, all engineering procedures.were - . cStatus: ._ ~, ' N "; { '.ui - consolidated and revised.) All engineering- - w- . 1 1 procedures.providing; instruction on. writing - ' i . 1 safety. evaluations wereTsuperseded by procedure > " = NFEP'012, " Written Safety Evaluations'_',.during - v[<.,. - , , . .. _t q, g . ,;i.s; closed.j" ~ This-IPEP.; action (RP-05011) a.
ithis program 1 upgrade.: , w y,t,, - ~ ' , _ ' 'W - -.. . -
- 05-1(02)nCommitdent
LImplement: practice whereby.ALARA reviews are ' ' ' ~ ~ .. .iproperly conducted in reviewing facility change requests'(FCR).' '
- ' - , . . .. . > , , .,cStatus:' , ', , _ . On July 112,1984,; AD1845.02,!"FCR Initiation and 1 Development",;was. issued.
Section 11.3-11.5~ , , g
- established instructions on ALARA reviews. The
, E ' MJ review has been assigned to the Chemist-Health ' ' ~ a , l Physicist,HealthPhysicsSupervisor,orthe - LChemical and Radiochemical Supervisor. This IPEP . - , ' ' , , -action-(RP-05012) is closed g
- ,
, 5051(03)!LCommitmenti; [ Develop andLimplement a nuclearfoission
J! y W;r ~
- administrative procedure (Admin 013) to; assure-control of the 10 CFRl50.59 determination process. y
~ @ ' g..
' i - w > - . ... . , EA EStatus: 4f0n' November 11, 1983, the-VP, Nuclear' issued ,
-
- procedure Admin.- 013 " Safety Evaluations",-in
" . ' ' the Nuclear Practices and--Procedures Manual.
' ' .. ~ Thisiprocedure provided corporate guidance on ,- - . JN 10'CFR 50.59 evaluations.
This IPEP action
~ ? . l(RP-05013)~is closed.
_ ' -
,, , 05-l'(04) Commitment: LRequire'that safety evaluations'be written for.
~ ^ ~ ,. i, - ' "' ~' non-conformance~ reports (NCRs).which are > s dispositioned as'.Use' as' is/ repair".
.. m
, .N
- k s s
< s
- L.
- .
e ." te.
$ - 7; ; t ~ - _.. %
> ' ' -27.
, , si i , W:).a ' ' - [E.- ___& m
~ - + ., - ., _ . _ . . . <. s .. ., , 5, Nb g .
j _y u; + / + , - ' '~ jfwg . T k.
' N _ r 1 j St'atus:' "NFEP-060',H" Processing NCRs,3 SDRs and'SDDRs", was ' - - l changed to; require. written. safety evaluations.- l ' - on "use as is" dispositions in Step 20. This1 i y ' , , > ~ IPEP' action (RP-05014) is clos'ed.- ,, , _ . . .# ,, , , ' Y' ' 1054(05).CCommitaent: !ImproveilicenseecontrolofNieldchangenotice" 7- ,f =(FCN); handling by. processing;them through Facility '
. - iEngineering before they~are given to the. field for a_ w,- . w* = r..a.
3 implementation.
'~ ' u , ., ~ <%_ ' , ; ;; 7 m; ';___
- ._,, _.
, . _, . Status:< " JA; November 2,_11983, meno established the Bechtel " W> Resident Engineer ass.the focal' point for'FCN- + > , W ? /tf*' P ' -disposition.,1A~specif.ic senior technical- , ~
- -
@ ;- # H . ass _istantiinNcclearfacilityEngineeringwas s & . ~T ldesignatert:to' perform thirfunction by meno on; ' ' - ' ' * " , ' ' January 18,' 1985. -This YPEP-action'(RP-05015) is , ' closed.
~~ - ,-- - + . , , [ ."05'-1(06)L Commitmentif IIssue'a charter for the saiW.y evaluation' review
^ . i subcommittee of the Company. Nuclear Revt w 3oard ~ c s > that describes'itstresponsibilities.
- m - , ' -- ..9.. O ~; ' j:7' l Status: This chsrter was approved on June 22,/1983. The ' _ "u - inspector. reviewed. selected minutes and' determined "* < 5w [. ' 'that the subcommittee was performing the' functions ~ ' ~ of:the charter..This IPEP action (RP-05016) :is - , K_ - - closed.
~ .', 705-1(57):! Commitment: Assure that close attention'is paid _to the content- '
' t ~' .of. safety: evaluations by having them carefully- ':_ reviewed byEsupervis' ors and the CNRB subcommittee .
- .. t n-a-
., i,7
performing:the evaluation and supporting studies.
~, ,, ~ - 'IPEP actions;05-1(05),-(06), (08) and (10) , ,~ _ 1Statusi - performed: parts of this IPEP action.- Also,. .y m c - ' ' Procedure NFEP-012, " Written Safety Evaluations", ~
, M_"~ _ was revised to' require a technically competent ,checkerfto review each safety evaluation. This-mM, . ., - y- ~ ^ IPEP' action (RP 05017) is closed.
- t_ _.
. ~ Prepare:to1 conduct orientation sessions on preper i~ . 505-1(08)~LCommitment: , g _ performance cf ' safety evaluations.
- m , _ y
Js, . Status:' l Orientation sessions: held.in July,.1984, had.no ' gy %go ' ? ' - records of~ attendance. :Since similar sessions , 3,qs - , .
- wjjj.be required to accomplish ~ steps.9, 10 and 11 m
. <of PEP 3 implementation plan D/SM-1, " Conduct and + y - ~ %, . ! Review / Approval of Safety Evaluat. ion", this item ,i - fFc, @ ' _ .has been included in D/SM-1 and will be monitored "- as-RP-99617.
This~IPEP action (RP-05018) is closed.
m_.
. -, N (
- L
' _. j b ; a; j q- , u:$ , S " (b , ,~ , A . g,, q
' , ;;y . . . { } d.
y , ' ~ ~ ^ c ,3 -
y - - ~. . - . ,; - yl - ,- -
, - Ce f t'.)- ' , , . - {05-1}09)[.Commitmenti LConduct al' task, analysis to: identify information- . e '
- required to perform safety. evaluations.and
. , - .'. l operability, determinations.- ' - , ~ Skatus: lThis ites'was included in Step 1~of PEP- ~ ' - implementation planLD/SM-1,." Conduct and Review /. ' - c -; Approval of Safety Evaluation" and will:be- ? monitored as RP-99617. Therefore,?this IPEP' _,- ,, .
- action'(RP.-05019) is closed;
[ J05'-1(1b){Commitmeni: Implement a requirement to'obtsin-in written form ~ , . '1 Lfrom contractors and. vendors any information used; ^ or basis:for' design or s'afety evaluations.
' J - .. .. .. . '
' Status: ' Procedure NFEP-012, " Written. Safety Evaluations", .
~ was revised.to provide engineering-supervision: - s , h ~
- with' guidance in step A.2 to obtain documentation >
i* ' ,necessary to support any conclusions in a safetyi - - evaluation..This IPEP action-(RP-05110).is closed.
~
- rea No'!l6 -
- Station Operations-9,
<
- -
. ,
- _
y N, _ : ,.. j06-2(01), Commitmenti
- Have Nuclear Sdfety monitor prog'ress on m
implementation of C&HP-(ALARA) projects-and ~~ - ff? - _ ' advise Projects / Davis'Besse Work _ Scope Committee . M- ~ l ~ -(D8WSC) of implementation ~ needs;and potential ' N , < o < . problems.
s , ,}, + ,~ " ' Status:' "
- NuclearSafet'yiscontinuingtomonitorhlARA
, _ ~ , ' - projects..This IPEP action (RP-06021) was reported to be in' progress ~in the.10 CFR 50.54(f) s.. response:and is considered open.
- ,, ? y f l06-3(01)LCommitment: ~ task _ group to review and revise the LAssign:a, jumper and-lifted wire program and existing.
- ' _ -
- recommend. completion responsibilities and
- schedule.
.. x .- 4' Status: 'As"a result of the jumper and lifted wire' program; review, AD1823.00, " Jumper and Lifted
. Wire Control Procedure", was revised to'. require- , , safety evaluations ~for jumpers and'. lifted wires,- i ,t
- ,. s . . = temporary mechanical modification controls and , ,.,f~ m, - evaluation, walk-down' and ' justification of log s ^ . entries in existence for greater than three " '+^s . . months. The success'of these actions will be . '" evaluated and are tracked as RP-99210.
This - w{q - ~ Linterim. action:(RP-06031). is considered closed.
. -5
- a : ' V
' s , ~t'
- 1' , '
, m_ % , %-
w
'
y - c1 _ - ' x 06-4(01). Commitment: . Complete. review of current procedure distribution . = procedure.
' Status: A review was' completed in February, 1984.
As a - result _of the review,-administrative assistants ,_ -were tasked with maintaining a copy of the Test and Procedures Index current through the use of , ' -pen and ink changes and given immediate , implementation T-Mods to speed-up dissemination - =- .mofethe.T-Mod to'the field.
This IPEP action ~ ' .(RP-06041)'is clos'ed.
~ 06-5(01)' i Commitment: Have Site-Safety Coordinator develop a book ~ ' containing hazardous material data ~ sheets for
- -
< call chemicals presently stocked on site.
~ Status: Material safety data sheets for. hazardous' chemicals -, ~ ~ were compiled and placed in an'index book in the , ' fall of-1984.' The book is not a controlled ~ document.
Updates and revisions are the-responsibility of the Station Safety Coordinator.
The books'were distributed throughout the plant . site.
This IPEP action (RP-06051) is closed.
'06-5(02) Commitment: Request that American Nuclear Insurers provide L guidance in warehouse. storage practices.
- Status: A f_ ire protection consultant from Marsh & McLennan . provided guidance, via letter,.on warehouse storage-practices on June 28, 1984.
This IPEP action (RP-06052) is closed.
? LO6-5(03) (,mitment:
- Have fire protectio'n and safety coordinators
. conduct monthly tours of the warehouse, water- . treatment building and other station locations.
' 5tatus: Procedure AD-1835.00,' " Plant Cleanliness Inspection Program",.provided instructions for ~ fire protection area inspections.
In -,% ~ December,-1984, an audit of fire protection
tours conducted at the_ request of. management to evaluate this IPEP action generated Audit Finding - Reports (AFR) 1331-1 and 1331-2. The AFRs < revealed that no specific period had been established for the tours, tours were not being
documented and checklists were not generated for all areas.
Both AFRs were closed on March 21, ,, -1985,'after inspection checklists were developed - v.
and AD 1835.00 was revised to establish a monthly . inspection frequency. This IPEP action (RP-06053) is closed.
r e
b _ .. __- . _, ._ _ _ -
ps - a R
,
- y
- , , - ' ' . p. w , - - , - 06-5(04)'r;l Commitment: (Modify Procurement's ordering process to include-1
. _.. - , . [ ,, . . f ~ ~ - requests -for: current Material Safety Data' Sheets - , W'e -
. . ifor all-: bulk chemical, products which may havel O J j.. ftoxicorhazardous, properties.
'
~ 1 'm _ Statusi- -In the fall of:1984, thE following: generic + ~1 ' ?#E s . _ - . ' purchase; order statement was provided: " Vendor.
~ , . g .x, *.; - * ; '" ~.lis(to' supply 1 appropriate MaterialiSafety Data,
,- , 4 j u - w.;.'
- - sheets which are to be' submitted with the pacting- ' ' ' , - .J ' - !11stLfor'each. shipment." The! statement is.to- - f -
- be included 'on.all purchase-orders for_ bulk. ' chemicals. This IPEP action-(RP-06054)~is closed.
' m . j f '06-5(05);cComm'itaeht: 1Have Materials Manager ensure that all drums and ~ ' containers received-at the, site-are cle~rly~ a , l - -labeled-by'-the manufacturer.
' - .Statusi }Thepurchasingdepartment; reviewed.the. applicable.
- ' s laws governingLlabeling:of--substances for shipment.
Thefr;esult~of the review was,that Item 4, J ' ' T, . Compliance, of the' standard 1 term's and conditions - ;j, .in purchase ~ orders require proper labeling.under Ye - Lthe Code of-Federal Regulations. This IPEP ' ' mE ' ' action.(RP-06055) is closed.
h . O ^ ' = Review station housekeeping and cleanliness !06-5(06): Commitment: ' $ ' procedure to' determine if additional guidance' ' ~ {- ~ ' can be given for observation of general chemical _; handling and: storage concerns.
. Status: l Procedure-AD. 1836.00, " Hazardous Waste and
- ' --
' Chemical Management was' issued on December 19, - . " ' ? i1984, to provide.the additional guidance.
This ,
- w LIPEP action (RP-06056).is closed.
, . ~ 5' ~ L rea No.l8 -? Training _ _ A ~. , - - 1, , .iO8-1(01):. Commitment:-
- Contract for an~ acting training manager.
~ g . - ~ ' ' . Status:. In January of'1984, a consultant became the . 4, @. K ~ .a'cting training manager. This IPEP action ' (RP-08011) is closed.
'i f . . . u
- ~
s08-1(02) iCommitment: Hire a'new training manager, ms ,, - >
ye ,
- Status::
- The consultant has been replaced with a permanent
_- ~ licensee. employee as the training manager. This N_ - IPEP action,(RP-08012)~is closed.
_ . M' 508-1(03)~~ Conduct:a problem identification diagnostic on Commitment: g,' , ,the Training Departmentc ~ > ' - iP~ b.: n ' '
+ , , A r,,_ ..... -
e, pn ^ 7,
.i %L '
, , -,
, , r ) ;m. @ I- } $ \\, .d ~
- .;y
,. k [' , f I l
.c J- . p. _ a
- 8 3
.a.. , ,.:a; . ? _ , p: . ' gg ~ '; A
- i ;.- y c
.g, _ . , . - - sjk ; Status:+ " >The diagnostic-was performed and212 sued one _ m n~-
-
- 50 - <
^V - Mpril;24,1984.1,The corrective actions taken'to
resolve the problems; identified-shall'be the . -. ,
= subject'of futurelinspections.- This'.IPEP action - ' ' ~
- ' , J
- (RP-08013). remains open.
' _ , ' . .. .. .- -
N._ ~
- .08-1(04) Commitmentit
_Have" contract a'dvisors' work with training.
, , supervisors through May:31,D1985 to develop.
.. ,_ - '
- objectives / action plans and evaluate training
' ~ - . ~ activities.
- ,.
_ i a - ' ,. . m
$ Status: JContract'advis' ors were'-first used in the winter ~ -
- )
of11984, but were. phased out in the summer of , .* m.
- ,
~ , - '1984.
This-IPEP' action (RP-08014)Jis closed.
. . - %, -
.. . 5 Fill [six (6) approved open' positions in Training - , - 108-1(05)MCommitment: -
- Department.
'
' g ' , J ' ' N,_ l Status: _ 'Theladdition of_.6 personnel was superseded by IPEP 08-1(17) which commits to~an additional 13 . ' - - 6_ _ personnel. This-IPEP action (RP-08015) is closed.
' u- . , k 1v 108-_1(06): Commitment: Completeia"n6eds analysis: effort for maintenance
' - , - . training.
. . ~ a E [ Status: The needs analysis has been performed. This IPEP '* - . action-(RP-08016) is considered closed.- V (O'8-j(07')TCommitdent:
- Reorganize the Training Department along
' . , functional. training s'ystems process lines.
g 3 . t
- -
, , (Status: The training organization was structurally ihanged ' _ Lin-January ~of 1984.
This IPEP action (RP-08017) + ' , , , is closed.
4 g '
... . . .... 08-1(08):fCommitment:. . Identify:and initiate corre::tive action for the
,4 - ' '~ ~ ~ ' specific inspection report findings regarding- _ , - _ training per existing commitments defined in the '
- ?
- November-25, 1983, response lto NRC.
D > .,a + u- ^ ' ' ' StatUsil LThehorrectiveactionshave'beenperformed.
The .x ., De ."W . inspector's review of--violation 346/85019-05 is.- ' 1( # .
- contained in-Paragraph 2. of this inspection : report.
'This IPEP acticn (RP.-08018) is closed.
f >M . -, w ,.
- Develop'a procedure for requalification training
,., "c .' ! 08-1(09)T Commitment:~ %WT ~ um, .
- for..non-licensed operators.
~ <
- _
'h - - IStatusic AD1828.16,~ "Non-Licensed Operator Proficiency ' ?y ' ' -delineates requalification training-for-Training",-issued on December 13,.1984, &
non-licensed operators. This IPEP action ~ r ' '(RP-08019) is closed.
, , .
x $ ,.p- ' ' '
u, ' (_ g ' '
._ ,, yc , s l
- h
~
- ,
_ "
y u , _
.m_ - . - I
- ., [d '
, .g,- - - : , > , 08-1(10)fCommitment': Establish accreditation of'the training program " - ^ asLa.-long rate _ objective.., - ' Status: The inspector has: determined..through discussion - , with'the licensee'that INPO accreditation is the.
~ ~
- training division's-long. range ~ objective. This IPEP-action.(RP-08110)Lis closed.
~ > w_ [... - . ~ 08-1(11) l ~ Commitment: Establish;aLNuclear. Training;0versight Committee.
~(TOC) tofreview progress and direction for - '
- Training Improvement-Program.
, 1, < Status:- -
- The'iTOC1was established,-then dissolved when the 2>
. _- ' - > LNQAM.was rewritten;to des'ignate the appropriate:
- division directors as responsible;for training
. associated.with their divisions. The training , ,, 3po ' manager was made responsible only for-the . . _ training of station. personnel.
Therefore, a. " Training Review Board was' formed consisting of' ' , ~ ., station and division s'upervision.
This IPEP - Laction-(RP-08111) is closed.
~ - '[ [08-1(12) Commitment: Prepare a charter for-the' Nuclear Training , .0versight; Committee (TOC).' . Status: A charter.was; draw'nfup and issued on January 31, , -. 1985, for.the Training-Review Board instead of for the' dissolved TOC.
This IPEP action ' ' ~(RP-08112)~is closed.
_., . 108-1(13)?Commitaent:- Complete;an evaluation of options to improve the y 'E . current off-site (operations / simulator training ' -. r ' program.
r Status:. 1The licensee has co.nitted to have a simulator - . operational by December,:1988.
This:IPEP action- 'J (RP-08113).is closed.
, E E - 08-1(14) X Commitment: ' Develop a procedure for~ approving training
- c.~
, activities not conducted.through the Training-Department.- < , , '"2 Status: Procedure NSP/NT-003, " Management of Mission - , , y ? - Training Offered Outside Nuclear Training.
% Department", was issued on May 1, 1984.
This . - ' procedure provides. training manager overview on . _x training-programs given to station personnel > outside of' specific instruction given by the' i > - training division.
This IPEP action (RP-08114) is closed.
^
E, _ ' ^q
- u.
a. 4 ' - ' - - -
33 , . h _._ -
y =, y c j, _ , i @ , ' ' g, L < . ~ . , m p 'ya_.
w - - - , n; e e. , . c _<
- a_-
ab ' '
- n
, , , ' ., - . 7.
. . , , .
- 08-1(15) ? commitment
- t _'Developsa' procedure for developing and approving
- ' .
.+ . . p. lesson. plans.
- > .
, g" , , -n . 7;, ,
- p
- --
s- , , _ / Status:
- Procedure NSP/NT-002,'1" Development and Approval
~ - ' < _ r.
of Nuclear. Training Department Lesson Plans", x
, . twas issued on May 1, 1984. /This IPEP: action q - " . f '(RP-08115) is' closed.'- ~ f.
, , < 08-1(16)h Commitment': Perform'ani ndependent review of the latest QA.
i >
- s -
~ ~ training program. materials.- - ~. v, '.
3' Status::
- The1 independent 1 review was performed by
- a
' v.. #- consultant andithe=results provided to the " ic licensee:on May 19,':1984 ; Portions of ~ the . f . review wereLincluded in PEP. item _D/QA-1,- - s > .~ Y .. / ^ '"QA' Awareness, Program",:and a portion of the.
, _ ' review wasiin' the -IPEP actions in ' area No. 9.
- This IPEP_ action (RP-08116).is closed.
, , _ , . i.
,u ,.. Fi11213 newly' approved positions in~the Training 108-1(17). Commitmenti ~ e
. Departmentf p, . - iStatus': ~ CThe'. licensee._is continuing to acquire the-
- -
- .. - additional-personnel. The-COA identified,this' - - + u-action as still_in process. This IPEP action- ' - ' ?(RP-08117)~ remains open.
- - Y <AreajNo'91-LQualityAssurance.(QA), ~
. , [' ' 09-1(01); Commitment: Return' operations QA' Supervisor ~to.his QA^ .
- duties _from' temporary assignment in the training _-
. . - : department.: , x. _., e W
- Status
- .
iThe QA Supervisor is now functioning as the QA- , Supervisor and 1s no longer < assigned to the-m':p ~ m straining department. This IPEP action-(RP-09011)
- isiclosed.
'q ,, - ' 109-1(02) ' : Commitment: EContract for three_outside personne11to' " ' Joupplement the'TED QA staff.
i ' , , .s yo , iStatus: ,Three personnel were contracted for end.
. i " _ _ ~ ' 1 functioned.as quality assurance auditors'in . . ~ " '" -
- 1984.3 This' I?EP actkn (RP-09012) is closed.
' > g' n; _ * $09-1(03I; commitaent: ! Hire or transfer-in four' additional QA staff-e - - - 7 members.
. [' + - ? Status: .One'QA auditor was. hired in November, 1983, two: ~ in January, 1984, and one in March,-1984. This-i%_ ~ jlPEP: action (RP-09013) is closed.' " ~ ' . _ -
_ -
rt - ' s n ~
- .
. ~. , _
- y so, > (-.
23 g g , , . L gi g h t , c my, _:. .u n. a. p,';3
, -, ,- p- ..s ww i <
- ~
- p
,, ,; - r s s -m - -< - ~ -, a_ .. - , ~g ' y.
" .., M J ^ l0btainflicenseemanagementapproval.to.use- , - LO9-1(04)JCommitaent:. > - contractor personnel for audits so that newly-hired A QA. personnel;can be better trained before assuming: ' ' , y, -
- ce
.their auditing positions.
' , s - - ... Status:: .... Management approval was received and the' personnel . . . . ji , E
- ' 1 acquired-in IPEP action RP-09012 were used for.
'7 ; - ~ D ~ audits..This-IPEP_ action.(RP-09014).is closed.
' ' , ,, 1f ^ T09-1(05):(Commitsent: Hire / contract)and train 2-3 additional QA staff: -
.
' ras soon as:possible".- ~ . . - 2St'atus: -. Personnel.were-hired and contracted..This IPEP ' ~ action _(RP_-09015)_.is closed.
' N '
v - [b9-1(06)5!CommiteeEti
- Assign a' staff-member'from Nuclear Training
~ _ Department to QA to coordinate the development " < , , .. of a training program for QA personnel.
x - Status: .A person-was assigned and a training department
. n e person is still assigned to the QA departraent.
. , - -This~IPEP action (RP-09016) is closed.
~ , ~ [09 1(07) Commitment: fHaveaconsultantconductajob/taskanalysisto-
~ ' . ~ - determine-the type of training that would be most beneficial to QA personnel.- ~ ' ' , ,, u . , ' Status: The~ job / task analysis was performed and the.
m :% analysis'was provided to the'. PEP team'for , '
- D/QA-3, "QA Auditor. Commensurate Training
- c - ' . Program". This.IPEP: action (RP-09017) is closed.
- T09-1(0')::Commitme'nt: Prepare a. schedule for the-development of the
i ~ training program recommended in the. job / task , ., ~ t_ ' analysis report.
,t Status: This action was. included:in PEP action plan
- .
X ' .D/QA-3, "QA Auditor. Commensurate Training . , Program".
This-IPEP action (RP-09018) is closed
_ _and 0/QA-3 wil1~be monitored as RP-99591.
_ , e , 09-1(09)' [ Commitment: Schedule a-QA individual to begin Shift Techr.ical g ' - t - f, " .'. Advisor (SlA) training'. , , ~ ~,. ~ One'QALstaff member attended the STA training in WY, ' - HStatus: i' H-1984;and another. individual'is now attending.
i' 'This IPEP action (RP-09019) is closed.
' '
- g 509 1(10'). Commitment
ScheduleLparticipation of QA staff members in
my, " N ', x
- in-house and~outside training programs.
~ . , -
, r A , 'u M h.
. _ _ ,_+) ' , :a - , , '35 m-c 3 /- u u.
, , _
+ _ . n , ' . __,
m . , m,, , _ , . pw _ , - t - , x , jpe +: - ".Yf' A: f, a ~p %: - ' , ,
yt s - ye ,, ,,, 2 ' w ': - '
. m;g[',: ,, x , [ ei s Status': ' $0uts'ide training wasIscheduled for the'QA/QC ~ , fstaff for 1984.
Further training needs'will ? '^*1 % n > -- ?W Lbe evaluated;as; PEP, action plan D/QA-3, "QA: ' g . ~ _ .'; Auditor Commensurate Training Program",. step 3.
(Q~'T- - . ~ = ,- .This11 PEP action (RP-09110).is closed.
c yy , _ J, . - _ W.
.m ~ , l? .: C.09-1(11)3 45 Commitment: fBaselthe: proposed 1984QAaudit!scheduleionr x4 f ma-s , activities under the purview of:the-QAl program,. ' . 3o ' ' = Exhibit C?of-the. Nuclear Quality Assurance 3' > , . jG,, 1 ^ i anual.(NQAM),vrather than on departments M ' %*MQ , & ~- performing safetyyrelated_ activities as'.in: . . ~.,; M ithe past.
' m.
, c_ - LStatus: ' Procedure QdI' 4186, Internal: Audit-Scheduling", ? '7 _ A ' -+ ~ -was: revised to perform. audits'to Exhibit.C of ' x f . - < . _ sthe'NQAM. This-IPEP action =(RP-09111) is closed.
'4 ' ' ' m .. - _ _ Oh-liO) :-[CSamitesnt:~; Develop audit matrices.for?each-activity under dn w<t ~ Lthe purview of-the QA program;sinstruct QA 4F - , .; P"J - > .a.uditors that over a two year period their.
~ ~ b 3R " ? audits mustlinclude.;airepresentati.ve' sample; ' . j. s a: ~ - from each of the applicable matrix items.
^ ~ - A . ,
{ Status:s '. Procedure;QAIL4186,." Internal Audit Scheduling",. ^ <v _ ,, ^ was revised to require audit matrices for audited; , g:C-
- -
t. activities and to require that audits be conducted- -s l'J ' so that every matrix elementris completed inside a ' ~ ' M J, ' period of two years.,~This IPEP action >(RP-09112).
," ~ is' closed.
,L -
_ .t ?// ' W' ~ ' ' ' !an~ audit-team concept whereby the. audit team IO9-1(13) iCommitment: Restructure internalsaudit organization based on.
%m - 11eader assignments are' divided among QA: auditors - +
y ,. Q cand the' balance of the' audit staff form an; auditor - f' ~ ~ ~ pool.to assist the audit team 3. leaders as needed.
,
. ..1 ,
%1~ ~ >Stetus:.- rWith the addition'of new personnel performing . d; LM- . the audit function,.not'all auditors were _ n9~ ^ t 1 assigned responsibility for a particular area.- ' "; - LTne' unassigned' auditors form the:auoitor-pool.
?- E, Aidiscussion.with the QA' Manager revealed that - the " pool" concept was' the method established .;g w, '- M:c i'oriassigning' audit responsibilities.
This IPEP - > a . , DB _ W i - . action (RP-09113) is closed.
' wu; s J u'3M : ~ ,
. Q-(Developandinitiatee, pilot-programthatuses-M w a ^209-1(14) fCommitment: 'm , s - . technic ~alJstaff. members from elsewhere in the - f gn . nuclear mission'as support personnel on QA audit - " g%y ? : p p teams.
, o y g
, ,
- x (,~
LSiatus: ' Use;of techritcal! staff members on QA audits was ' n,. formalized by Procedures.QAI 4185, "QA Audit f ^ - " ' Personnel-Qualification", and QAI 4186, " Internal . ' ' " ^ Audit Scheduling".
This IPEP action (RP-09114)' ' -
is closed.
, - ~ m ' .. .. -u
e g:7. > , , " V- @ j - .. e,,, -. _.. E'-.-.......;....,,,,,m,,.... _,,,,_,,_...m..,__,.,,mm .,, _.,,. _,,..... _, ,._,_.,m .. _,,, _, _ r5 ' lb + ,
- g-7.
> <
- 4,- ,,H ' , .
- r '
' .- J ~ ,4;+ ,%, <). ' t
- i, q;,
v ,,;, : L g ,' [~+1-
- -# ' ' - - , .. h.
iArea '.No.1101 Commi tmenti, Trac ki ng/Li cens i ng ; ~ -
,t ,* - ' ~ ' , ,. ....., ,& .- %.. , - -,. . _
~ ' # 410-1(01)_..Commitmenti,, Perform a detailed search of NRC incoming /outgoingL ~ e ' +: - ~ ~ ~ ~ correspondence'for commitments.
_ _. Status:. ' Procedural' controls were established to review ' -
- Generic Letters, NRC letters, IE Bulletins, IE
. y c ^
- ~Information: Notices,.IE Inspection Reports and' ,"< ^ Licensee Event: Reports for commitments in.
_ m' - '
- NSP/LIC-004, " Licensing. Commitment Tracking _
. ' ' . System".
Outstanding commitments made prior to "- the procedure going into effect were not addressed.. Assuring that all_ commitments are > - . . > - identified will-be addressed in D/L-1, " Commitment Management",. step 7. _This IPEP- . . action (RP-10011)_is closed.
" m 710-1(02) Commitment: Investigate-other commitment systems.
' ' =InLlate February 1984, Nuclear' Licensing-Status:- requested Technical Resource Services conduct " ' ' 'a1 diagnostic to determine requirements-for a 7 commitment control and tracking system..This _ , ' _ . request was made after reviewing the commitment' - . tracking system: of four~ other utilities.
This- ~
- .IPEP' action ~(RP-10012).is closed.
~ - x .. . -Evaluate-problems in commitment control and ' . (10-1(03) - - Commitment:- ~ . ' - tracking.
' ' ~ ' ,
~ . Status: iTheLTechnicalResource_Servicesdiagnostic ~ - . _ requested in IPEP-action 10-1(02) was completed and provided to the D/L-1, " Commitment Management", ~ . _a ' ' ~ ' PEP _ team on November 1, 1984. This IPEP action ~' (RP-10013).is closed.
,
- P
_.. N >;
- 10-2(01) Commitment
Concentrata efforts of Nuclear Licensing personnel -- 3 . . 'on commitment : tracking. reports to. assure that.
responsible _ organizations meet their requirements.
' Status: The: licensee procured a_ personal computer and ' . , programmed.it to track Licensing Commitments.
' , m % The computer and support personnel were acJed '
. RA, from corporate headquarters ~to the site to , s enhance communications.
This IPEP action (RP-10021)-is closed.
' m . .10-2(02)I Commitment: Distribute commitment tracking reports listing ' upcoming coemitment dates and overdue commitments ~ ' - to Division Directors and the VP, Nuclear.
a +
37 , y - r -
p D- ' - ' ^ ~ " - h y $,. m - , '
I ~ , , . ' f~~ ' m %,,k <'" '- ,- ~ [~ - / Status:: -Procedure NSP/LIC _004,x" Licensing Commitment ~ Tracking System", issued January 1,1984,
, " - festablished.. specific time frames for distribution w - c . ' ^ of= commitment status. 10n November 1, 1984,n d- -
- management requested an-audit of the commitment'
' ' _ 6'k ,
- tracking process. -The December 1984; audit-
^ g7 -
. revealed (AFR 1331-3) that the' status reports: Twere-not distributed regularly.
NSP/LIC-004.was ' , < - ' ~ g
- revised;on January 15, 1985~,.to req'uire a monthly
+ , ,
- status report to the VP,: Nuclear.and the. Division y "-
. . Directors. The-AFR was closed on: February 28,. J
, , ' '
, ' 1985.~ tThis"IPEP actionf(RP-10022) is closed.
o ' -
- , 1.
[104(03)TConsitment: Assign the commitme'nt tracking. function.into a
single' individual to assure continuity of "- -, *P ' '
-tracking.
g , w: e - Status: <The Nuclear. Compliance Coordinator was assigned
- ,c f the tracking function in the January 15, 1985,- ' revision of Procedure.NSP/LIC-004.
Discussions
- with the licensee revealed that the. tracking,
_ R-function-is being performed by a Senior Licensing ~ - ' ~ . - , LSpecialisti This.IPEP action (RP-10023)'is closed.
. - ~ 110$04)' Commitment: Assign.each commitment to a cognizant licensing .n - department member who-then'has the responsibility
~ '_ --of tracking it to completion.
- A ' * EStatus: ProcedureiNSP/LIC-004 issued on January 1, 1984, ~ ~ , i assigned a cognizantilicensing individual for - each commitrant.
On Ncvember 1, 1984, management " , ' ^ = requested an audit of the commitment tracking , " .. ' process.
The December, 1984, audit revealed ' , ^ *. .(AFR 1331-4) t'.at _the procedure did not specify " the function;of the cognizant-individual and a " ~ ~~ ' . number of-personnel assigned commitments no - ' _ .
- onge~r were employed by the' licensee.
NSP/LIC-004- - .. ~ was revised on January 15, 1985, providing ~ ' instructions to the cognizant, individuals and ' ' '
- _ J'
- f ' ' updating the cognizant individual assignment list.
The AFR was closed on February 28, 1985.
This ~- , ,,M, IPEP. action (RP-10024) is closed.
. , -
. , d M y 110 2(05):l Commitment:
- Transmit a meno.from the VP, Nuclear to all L
&* L - ' Nuclear' Mission personnel that strongly * i , emphasizes the importance of meeting commitments in a timel.y fashion.
. , ^ . .
- [
~ ESt'atus':' "AF5bruary 15', 1984,-memo'from the VP, Nuclear .. _ . . . i ~ to all nuclear mission personnel stressed timely -" ". fcommituant resolution.
This IPEP. action - - a J_(RP-10025) is cle.ted.
,w , , .. [ ~
- ~ ; a.
t
- -
't e m w-t+i+,-c-+3,w,=ce - -e9 -,-+w,- c --+=.-w.<% .*-*w ..e-s.
.- e we --~,ww w,-ec ,- ---rw ww- +
p p.;, , - ~ - . _ , , , , , _ , _ , ,[ +Q . . e, . x-a- - , , n % ,- ' \\ l' ~, ' - ' 110-3(0')IlCommitmentii . Assign the duties of Ledd Licensing'. Specialist ~ '
<
J ~
- to R.. Peters and the duties 1of Operational.
~ ' u.m Licensing Specialist to licensing staff: members.
,,. M until permanent; replacements for the positions ' ~ can be. hired.
" ' . , ' ' '
- Stat 0s:
-Thes'e_ reassignments did not occur'dueLto ~ m' O_ . , q.
~ .under staffing problems.'.Later, new personne1' _g, '. '.werefacquired and the. licensing department.
' reorganized. - This IPEP action (RP-10031)-is - . i closed.
< . 110-3(02)/ Commitment: -Obtain two contract pe'ople for placement in Nuclear Licensing through 6-84.
'u . Status:. ~ One contractor was~obtained in the spring of , 1983, and.the other.was obtained'in the fall , ~. _ '~ f 1983.
Both contractors worked in the area o . Tof fire protection.
This IPEP action (RP-10032) . . is closed.
- [10-3(03)$ Commitoerit: sIssue career. opportunity announcements to " '~ . "_ determine if in-house' candidates might exist > , ' for.ithe Lead Licensing Specialist and Operational ' Licensing. Specialist positions;.have' employment , , provide outside' candidates , , - Status: .. . . ' . . . The-Lead Licensing Specialist' position was filled . ' > -in, April 1985.
The Operational Licensing Specialist position was deleted.by reorganization.
This IPEP action ~(RP-10033) isiclosed.' ' ' . < .10-3(04) Commitment: . Initiate efforts to fill remaining five open o .
- positions in Licensing.
. m _'. . x Status: After the IPEP positions.were. identified, the '
" ', - Licensing department was: reorganized and position , titles changed.
However, five new personnel were '4 ' , '_ 1added to the: Licensing department. The position
- titles are11isted.below along with the month-that
'~ e .
- the. position was filled
, , }(1)RegulatoryImpactCoordinator-September,1984 , a ^ (,'~. - (2) Senior Licensing Specialist - October, 1984 y a: c (3)-Nuclear Specialist.II --December, 1984 y (4) Compliance Administrator - April,.1985 ' (5) Senior Licensing Specialist - September, 1985.
, . A A '
_ , ' . . 3rwrume-4..=mr,-tr u-e redmhe e a: --c-w--4 e w cr -en ar+ 'ury r=s--z--+
y.- ~' qf.j.: , bL ' _ r . g~\\ + , , _ , , ' .'
' , _ ._ s -, , ' e ' _ , , ' 'f ' -This:IPEP' action (RP-10034)-is closed.. ~ ,, - .f . I E.
' J10-3( 5) Commitment: LRecruitlan entry-level individual to join-s ' ;, M ' J Licensing.
' ~
- . ~
k'_ ~ - ~ ^, Status:
- [Therind'iUidual to be recruited was a student T-M [
_
- then working in the licensing department.
Upon
' ~ ' graduation,' the: student quit. This'IPEP action , _ , .'(RP-10035);is closed.
-
)10'-3(06)<C'ommiiment:
~ ~ ObtainLthe temporaryise"rvices:of-an individual' s - - from Cleveland Electric Illuminating to support- - + 111 censing.
'
- > . ~ s 1Statust O'ne;pers'on was utilized in January, 1984. This- ~ ,. IPEPraction (RP-10036) is closed.
t - . m ^ + _ . ' y y (10-3'(67)'Commitmenti, Obtain contractor support to complete certain ' 'proqrammatic requirements such as'the'SAR. update.
, , , ?- -Status': .Th s:IPEP action l(RP-10037) was reported as; ' f_, a L . incomplete in'the. licensee's response to the
- . 2:
," L10 CFR 50.54(f) letter, and-it remains open.
, 3.;, - ,LAreaNod11$-(Purchase. Order, Designation- ' ~ . l11'-1(01)?l Commitment: ' Issue.nemo from'J. Helle to R. Miller requiring
. modification tolprocedureslto vendor and ' , contractor;non-Q purchase requisitions to be ' - + - reviewed by Engineering.
J e , ' Status': LBefore~ performing an engineering review of.
< ^ ., _ . , , .(purchase 1 orders, management { requested an audit % - - stoidetermine the~. depth of;the problem.
.IPEP- , ' . . laction'07-1(13),- audit'1157, did not' identify a.
i en m ~.p 'significant-problem. This~ IPEP' action (RP-11011) ,.7 ' - x w is-closed.
, - _.4 . . ... .i n .. . .' . ' m w . 911-1(02)DCommitment: Issue memo from J. Helle to sectiun heads - , explaining-why they are receiving non-Q purchase >; - ~
- requisitions-and what to review for.
. Status:- Based on the results of 11-1(01), no meno was ' "1 gc.
necessary. This IPEP action (RP-11012) is closed.
4y '4fea No'. 12 -l Engineering?
-p12-2(01)LCommitment: LIssue Electrical Distribution Manual as a- ^ s.. -: 1 V ' controlled ~ document, a.. M3- '3 e
} ~ - ,
, ' ..7 w .m , _ -
+ , _ w . - - . ' . - +
.. -
- . , =n - Status:- 1The Electrical Distribution Manual was' issued as.
, ' controlled drawing.E-1040-A on January 28,-1985.
' The closure of AFR 1138-04-on April 19, 1985~, . confirmed the controlled status-of the Electrical - Distribution Manual. ~ This lPEP; action (RP-12021)' ... - z
Lis closed.
f12-2(02) iCommitment: cDevelop plan'and procedures for updating the-. . Electrical Distribution Man'ual and assuring that.
Littis' maintained land implemented.
r . Status: 'The Electrical Distribution Manual was added to ' E - the FCR checklist.
The instructions for_use of the ~ checklist are in NFEP-020, " Design Work Packages".- This-IPEP action'(RP-12022) is closed.
. [122(03) Commitment: Issue instrument index as'a controlled document.
~ IStatus: The instrument index-was issued as. controlled ' drawing M-720I:on May 23, 1984.
This IPEP action (RP-12023) is closed.
. > L12-2(04).; Commitment: Develop plan and procedures for updating the c . ' instrument.index and assuring that.i.t.is " ' ' , . maintained and implemented.
Si-c i , ' Status: The instrument index was'added to'the FCR - checklist.' The_ instructions.for'use of the - checklist are11n Procedure NFEP-20, " Design Work Packages"..This-IPEP' action (RP-12024) is-closed.
L 12-2(05). Commitment: Update control logic diagrams for SFAS,-SFRCS s ' and ARTS.
, i . " ~ This IPEP action'(RP-12025) was reported to be-Status: - - Lin progress in the licensee's response to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter, and it remains open.
' ("b ? . "12-3(01)- LCommitment:
- Have Bechtel correct inconsistencies between the H
SAR and~ piping. class sheets.
> t - ' St'atus: -Twc Facility Change. Requests (FCR), 84-046 and ~ 84-047 were issued to resolve the deficiencies.
A record review determined that both FCRs were
- -
, / ' complete.
This IPEP action (RP-12031) is closed.
, ~ ' 12-3(02) LCommitment:~ Update USAR based on FCR's which. identify inconsistencies between USAR and Piping Class - . - . Sheet.
. , . n ' i _ 41.
k T - ,-y-- --- =-*~ r + w =
rT*'s-wd 1*wa'-"- w--er W-'-O v er -+^**=7e* -=T =' -*- S- ,
Q}q / ' '~ ' ' - ,. ..
_ - S,- + e _
+- g%,;e " + t ;. - X.%; %.6 -
m -- , " ~ Statusi tThisilPEP:a'ction;(RP-12'032)-was reported to be ," m in' progress:in the licensee's response tof thej "- u,> ' 110 CFR 50.54(f)fletter,land it' remains open., , , ( = - .-
_ , - . ... -. . .. w - ... .. .... .. 4Have.Bechtel: prepare procedures to determine 12.4(01):! Commitment: s m
- fire protection:(F-list) andl seismic'2/11
'u /C, _ - , - , categories; TED approve procedures.and. modify .- '[ _ ' SQA Manual (3-16 - waiting for Bechtel estimate Mi- .. , , H% - - - nforLF-list) . - .- ~ ~, . ,... . . .. y,
- ",:#
> Status: The'QAManual:hasbeenrevisedfaddingprocAduresi ~ - _ m .- ' JEGP-02, " Identification ofcSeismic:But.Non-Q.
'- . Electrical Installations";fJGP-01,." Identification' ~
- , ~ '~ f: Seismic But'Non-Q Instrument 1and Tubing-0" ; : : , , o
. :Insta11ations'.'; MGP-01, " Identification of -
tSeismic But-Non-Q Mechanical Equipment", and- ' > , -
CGP-01,'" Identification ~of Seismic But Non-Q ' ,6 Structural Components".
These procedures are
g , ,s m , for:the seismic:2/1 categories'. , _ - '
- .. - . b.. _ . 1The "F" list was" included in'the Fire Hazard , s mm y-JAnalysis Report on. November 20,- 1984, by change
- notice 82.
This IPEP action'(RP-12041) is closed.
, m ! Area No? 13 -LIntegrated Living~ Schedule Program (ILSP)
~
, E b?- j3-1(01)1; Commitment: Retain contractor to-support ILSP implementation.
> - 'LStatust A contract'or was retained through mid-1985; A.
' . 1 - -permanent-ILSP Manager.was established on see-n . April:' 29,; 1985. 'In.the' September,11985 nuclear a. -n
- = mission reorganization.the position;was. renamed d
' ' the-Resource and Commitment Planning Manager.
, , ' iThis?IPEP action (RP-13011) is closed.
' '
' , njp - .,, - a . , m , ,,m.
H [" ' (13-1(02))'ConniismSnt':i IReview? finaliz'e and " submit; proposed license [ ' ^ _ seerdment and draft ILSP. plan to:NRC.
~ = z .n- . > M _ /, P IStatus:" lThdidrafCpiari'was Tsubmitted on January 20, 1984.
, L%- C, x ;
- !Thetlicer.se amendment 1was' submitted:on August 4, ' , My ' . i 1984.1 fThis~IPF.P action (RP-13012)'is closed.
^ -
4-$13-1(03)icoaditment: PrepareoverallIi.SP-programplantosupport ", * ' - '- '~ ' . program implementation.
, m -
> d Stiatus: - LThe program was described in the ILSP Plan ~
- license amendment. submittal of August 4, 1984.
> - > . s, The complete integration of the ILSP into the.
. 4: ~ -licensee's procedures and policies was included- '_ ~ - in PEP implementation plan F/TS-4, " Improve ILSP".
~ ' - This IPEP action (RP-13013) is closed.
s- . [ ._ ' f~
- ' _ _
%, '5' o ' .
_ , _ _ , .__ . _ - _.. ... _. - .. , kT - , i n = w ' i
m
- n
, "' 13-1'(04) ' Commitments ' To enhanceLth'e effectiveness of,the ILSP, include:
, , support 1for. project management activities as an m M80 objective for a11 applicable departments in ' ' ' - the nuclear. mission.
," - ., A + ~ LThe1ILSP was idclu'ded in the 1985 short range-. t Status:'. ' ' objectives for Nuclear Facility Engineering and: . fNuclear Projects.'- 'This IPEP action (RP-13014): . , y is. closed.
< - ~ J13-1(05).1Commitaent:' Conduct ~a~short term evaluation of the reasons ' ,why the 1984 Capital Work Scope _ Project schedule- - " , , _ ', . has slipped badly since September 1983.
'F iStatus: ~
- The. evaluation ~was' performed and wastused by the-
~ - , PEPLteam' associated with implementation' plan . F/TS-4. This IPEP action'(RP-13015)cis closed.
' 513-1(06)l Commitaent: Review,~make' appropriate changes.to' draft ILSP-- - = plan, and submit final license amendment to NRC .following receipt of NRC comments on draft ILSP ^
, plan.
~ Status': After submittal of the draft plan on January 20, ' -
- 1984, the NRC commented on the draft plan in a
' ~ . meeting on March 27, 1984..The plan was ' resubmitted on July 16, 1984, with the comments 1 e incorporated. LThis< closed the IPEP action ' ,
- '
(RP-13016); It was'later: determined that the s NRC would provide legal comments on the July 16, '
- c
- %
- 1984. submittal. <On Feb'ruary 28,.1985, and
, April:24,11985, meetings were held.to discuss ' '~ ' - ,' , ,, the legal-comments.
On ' June. 25,,1985, the plan u . ~ , T was resubmitted incorporating the legal comments.
y
Area'Noa14 - FireLProtection - , , '14-1(01)' Commitment:. - Develop a listing of the essential systems,
~ , ~ components, and circuits with~1ocation ~ ~ information required to achieve hot standby . ~f , and cold shutdown as a. result of a fire in m the-control room and/or cable spreading room.
' " Status: Theclisting was'provided to the NRC on i ~
- September 6,
- 1984, in Appendix A of.the
', _
- licensee's Appendix R Compliance Assessment A
_ _ . Report.
This IPEP action:(RP-14010) is closed.
14-1(02) Commitment: -Perform analysis and prepare alternatives.
- specifying the cost-effective' approaches to 4'
.- , achieve compliance with the requirements of
.
- ...
10 CFR 50, Appendix R.
k p
. >-
= n .- - ~ ~ -- v3 ~, f 4-7,=- ,; N, , , _. ' , y . ?:. g5 .;; <> < g Q,x -.
?-. ,:
. - , , < ,, ~ _a.
' 1l;? - L? Y s ,b . -, - s 4.
P .% ' - ,- s .. .'_ [Statusi- ~ ? $- Section 4 of the 1icensee's September 6,-1984, , - 3 Appendix R, Compliance Assessment Report, ?
~ , , s ,< , % - - Jidentified the; changes required to achievel ' ' s$', .... c . compliance with Appendix R. _This IPEP action: ~^ Q52 - . ~*.'(RP-14012)zis closed, ' .y y.
- _-y x " #14-1('03)'
- Fire Hazards.AnC ysis Report
- (FHAR),; Technical:
, , ~' ' j. Perform a compatibility. review between the~FSAR, Commitment: ' & - A ' LSpecifications, Land National Fire Protection.
sw m: ' . _ %cm m.- y , , Association 1(NFPA) relative?to_ fire protection .J ',_y: ' . commitments.
y , , -, - , - ,, .. ' Status: ALMay 9,.19'85, letter from.the;VP, Nuclear to < - the.NRC; Region III, Regional Administrator-n, . _ provided'a statusiof. this activity. ;The. letter. ' re - - , , s . _ stated that.the completed document review showed- ~ _ ' . - ' that: '(1) A FHAR revision would be-necessary to . - _ ' correct inconsistencies J(2) USAR and Technical- ,
- -Specification revision _would be;necessary to:
< - correct inconsistencies, (3) The; Technical ""( ( ' ' - n.
- Specification revision would be; accomplished.
' ' ' - .- ._ , - 1 ~~ ?' 2 T after receipt'and review of? Generic Letter 85-01,- "
, ,
-
- (4)- A series of field.v'erifications would bei
- accomplished documenting
- that the fire protection:
+ w ._ ' " , . c : system. installation is consistentLwith fire . g, - , 5 ' wt'd; ~
- 1,,
W protectio'n commitments.-iThis IPEP action s .,~ (RP-14013)lwa's reported io bejin progress,in ' ~ - - ,-
7 '4 - the' licensee's' response to.the 10 CFR 50.54(f) ' , , .a letter,~and-it will remain open until completion.
i ~ ' of the;4 items listed'above.
-[ "' a
' .. .. .. . ,
' f14-1(04) Commiiment: Perform an as'sociated-circuits analysis in
s - K ~_ ' accordance with.10LCFR 50, Appendix R, Generic ' ~ 1 Letter 81-12--'and the clarificationsletter.
,y - . . ... - v
~
- Statusi.
- lSection5:o'fthe-September 6,1984,AppendixR . <
Compliance Assessment Re' port;provided the results.- ,x W, .- a ~ - - =of.the' circuit analysis'.. This_IPEP action
h - _-(RPf14014) sis closed.
gl., -z.x , g; x. L14.1(05)i ommitment . Develop procedure and action plans for. controlling ' C fire protection findings and resolutions.
N ' ' - d i ?,- ' ' LNuclear--Practicesa and Procedures-Manual provides ! Statusi ' Procedure LIC-002,?" Fire Protection Audit Response % '" w - ' Program", issued on February 1, 1984, in the R<'~- < < . ^ ' ' ~
- a mechanism for identification, preparation,'
, , ' fresolution and closeout of the findings of the ,, " - Fire Protection Task Force. The procedure
. ' ' remained in effect as long as the task force ' , . , . existed.
Following disbanding of the task ' '~ ' , .
.'T.'
, 4.) .
i- ~ l L _ . ' < c _,
-yv
- 3 4 3p y
,
- -- . ~
& w $$1p Q h y ;*, , ^ i > '
> _ ' . g y& ~:K _ -n;3 c . . , _ -, - - - . _y . 3* y _ %_
' ( r - ' ' ' [ force [theTnormalconditions-adverse-toquality.
' m,yg ' '
~ ~ +
- reporting. procedures.wereito be used. This'IPEP
- a
. , - 1.- '.
action-(RP-14015)=is clo' sed.
H-y - n, . . yy " ];: ' 'g ' N4._ $ h.
114-1(06);)(Commitmerit: [ReviewanddocumentcompliancetoBTP9.4-l'- ! ,c $'&c- -cAppendix'A.
' ' ' ' . S yy[x . - 5tatus: [AMay9,i1984letterifrom:thefVP,-Nuclear.tothe '
~ YC_ RegionLIII Regional / Administrator' reported that
" - r - - ~#< _ ;the review of BTP'9.'4-1-Appendix A'was accomplished.
" . ' '-J with;the re"iew 'of the FHARxidentified.in; interim ' - '..t - - - (action'14-1(03).. The results of the review will " " ,- . J.
ibelfactored'into theLrevision of the-FHAR discus' sed a w
- in 1nteria actionL14-1(03).1 Therefore,.this;IPEP
' ' : action (RP-14016) is closed'and the FHAR revision ' - -
- will b'e monitored as RP-_14013.
' y, g 0 Area [No.?151-;P'roduciivityiand.QualityofLWork'- _
~ N
- The review offthis area' identified no required interia actions.
,, .
- n.
. .. - .. < - + ~ Area No' 716 - Projest Management: - % , '2 . - ' - .. . J'- .. ... . . .. f-, - L16-1(01); Commitment:.. ..Cl ari fy responsibili ty, < accountabil i ty, -
- ~
- and author _ity of Project Manager, Project
- ', '
- Coordinators and, Engineering Coordinator.
" y- - , m [ >
- Status:-
[0n September 1,'1984,;the Nuclear Projects-m* c " xi . Division was reorganized. LThe functions of the , - " s , l* '_ new organization.were approved on'0ctober 12, '
4 "1984. On November:14, 1984, the=' engineering c' . - , , 7: '$ ' managerfissued a nemo defining'the engineering ,
- 1 s
- tcoordinator's responsibilities.~ In November and- . < " M 1 M December of.1984,1theLNucleareProjects Division ' ' }s ^ : held meetihgs-to= discuss and clarify the roles- ' < , of the project manager and the project ' 3 - - ; , -.
'> ~ . coordinator._~After these-meetings,<a review .
- y
.l(-.
'~ ' q;
- of the' position description _ questionnaires (PDQ)
.y . 9p I for:the two positions determined that no changes- ,m ,
- to the'PDQs~were necessary..However,.further W
- '. J ,' ~ Ldefinition of the' project manager responsibility L . .wasiprovided in procedures NP-001, " Project - A Management' Nuclear' Mission", and.NP-002, ~ , , _ "Non-Capital,(0&M) Projects", of the Nuclear '^ ~ ' . . z - Practices and= Procedures Manual. -These " << i ,e , [ procedures.wereissuedonMay-17,1985. This-
' cs.
IPEPl action (RP-16011) is closed.
, Y (16-1(02) ~ Commitsent:L _ Clarify-how the Summary Level Planning worksheets ~~ ' ' - . .
-are used., w-s , c ?
< - % ' ' - ~
a . '
- j-Lj
p,_, - . . _ m7
- - < ~ ~ - -- , , (. , , , ' ' ' ' ' +J p:.. . , 2- +- ~-
- c
- - . - , . ' ' - '
,l.:..
, . . - ..'[ ~ ' Status: ~ Procedure PMS-002, '" Summary, Level Planning, of - . ' > ' . 1the Nuclear ProjectslDivision Procedures Manual, . 1.J ~
- n
' , - < . was'-revised on.May 28,:1985, to provideibetter n.
&- - ~
- guidance on-preparing and-revising the worksheets.
" , This IPEP action (RP-16012)~is closed.
w.
. E16-1(03)? Commitment:; s~ ~,~ ~ ' Initiate a; training program for project ' coordinators, engineering ~' coordinators', and ' ."N* implementation;(station) coordinator.- -
, , ~ ' j, 2 Status: TSome training was' performed in 1984, but was' - , ^ 3^. - not fully supported by the personnel.
Another. ~ !attemptLat providing the training was incorporated into. Step:3 of. PEP implementation plan F/TS-6(3), ,,, , , . " Improve Project Management Performance / Function".
"
- The'new training will be monitcred as RP-88021.
' 1This IPEP action (RP-16013):is closed.' , , ~
- 16-1(04) i Commitment
Resiew the valu'e of the current Project Management - ~ ,
_ JProject reporting process:(bi-weekly reporting on- '
- each project).
' , t ~ Itatus:: 1 Reviews ; determined -that-the7 bi-weekly reports-ishould continue.
This IPEP: action (RP-16014)- is closed.
, ?AreaN.171-jRecords1Managementi
- , ., 117-1(01) EComkitaent:;UserC5mmittee'establisheFandconsitteepurpose ~ ~ ' ~ , and scope defined.
- ~ > Status: The' committee was formed of Nuclear.and ' ' ' 'Non-Nuclear.. Mission personnel to' provide - , . suggestions on-improving the records management' - system.
The' committee did not have high enough ~ _ s - - management composition-to be' effective.and was disbanded.when the C/RM-series PEP team was: established.
This IPEP action (RP-17011) is- ,'. . 'cl osed. -
_ 717-1(02) i commitment:; Department assignments given to each committee - wp,- ' . m~, D
.. ! Status:x
- Members volunteered of committee assignments.
,
LThe committee was disbanded due to ineffectiveness- ' ' " , ' following the establishment of the C/kM' series ' _ _ , f n,c - PEP team.
This IPEP action (RP-17012) is closed.
, _ ~il7-1(03)l Commitment: Tentative action _ plan developed.
-, .- f"
-s 2-
' - . . r .i L g . '4
_ ~ ,._- -.. _. .
- m : 3 - - ,,7 ~ me ' ,
-N ' ' + . _ % < ' a y - ,
- ~
( - JStatss:
- TheTaction; plan became PEP; implementation. plans
'
' EC/RM-1,1" Nuclear: Mission Preparation for Useiof.
~ ~ ' ' Records' Management System", and_C/RM-2,4" Records _' .. . ' ~
- Management' System Enhancements".' These PEP = plans;
_..
- were. established,to revise the flow of documents
_ , "' ~ ' ito be' captured in the records management system.
, ~ E . 'Priorito thetIPEP, actions were-underway to update- ,_a - 4the" records: management hardware and software.
7,.2; __.s , Development-and acquisition-ofithe new: hardware
> e > >, , and software became;part'of IPEP actions . _ ~~ r =; 17-1(11-15). _ -A' document flow change was found - inecessary to better utilize-the new hardware-and . g ~ " ' software. ~C/RM-1lis:to" revise the. document flow . ' 'f-in the Nuclear Mission and.C/RM-2 is to~ revise a
- the: document ~ flow in the Non-Nuclear' Mission.
' _.' < g- - ' - j _
- ThisBIPEP action ~(RP-17013)Lis closed.
o
- ..
q _ , , , _.
, ,~ - :17 1(04)t Commitment: Evaluate' tentative action plans and assig Cstart . _ "andLfinish dates to each item.
' p' 54j;"' .<
~
, ' ' , _ 1StatusY %.
- Stadtland' finish dates ~were assigned in the PEP J
implementation plans and to!the' applicable IPEP W' ~ actions. This IPEP action (RP-17014) is clo~ sed.
y , v w ( ~ [ 117-l'(05)?; Commitment: 'qImplementIPEPactions17-1(07)throughi(15).
~ d JStatus:: 'Each IPEP action and-its status.is provided below; f.. ~ 'Any' incomplete actions will be tracked.
This . ?IPEP action (RP-17015)-is closed.
! ~ 117-1(06') ; Commitment: . Pub 1'ish' monthly)information and schedules for ' L ~ modifications 1to system'(SMI'S).
....
- IIRMUSERLNOTES,isnowpublishedmonthlyto
- Status:
R -
- provide system. modification information to users.
~ . . This IPEP action (RP-17016) is closed.
' 517-l'(07)JCommitment": S.velop'new d'ocument.. type numbering scheme for , ' a ach determined' data base, , , yb '; Status: . This ictinn has heen included in PEP Implementation 'W-Plan-C/RM-1,~" Nuclear Mission' Preparation for Use ' ' ' of Records Management System", step 3.
This IPEP
. action (RP-17017) is closed.' ~ ,, . 'f ".
- 17-1(08) -Commitment
- '
Develop a list of documents that should and "~ should not_be sent'to-I&RM.
' , ' ~ . - LStatus: This action has been incorporated into PEP
- implementation plan C/RM-1, " Nucle'ar Mission
' s , Preparation for Use of Records. Management System",
step 3.
This IPEP action (RP-17018) is closed.
. .1
-
, ' - -. l.
A
- .gu7 ,n ' w ~ % * ;g[. ^. , < ' fii , %. ] f% Q, . ' ,
- -
. ,
' ' a; r , _ , p ,- [17-1(09) g Commitment: ..In_ November.1984, a. full-time instructor was? Address training.: ' '
. . '. m - 3;. Status . . . _
~ . hired to_~ address training needs'. 'Also,' procedure . .I&RM:2.0,:" Retrieval Training",lwas-' issued on.
"' _, Octoberil,~1984. :This~ procedure provides p^ u 's+C '. ' eguidelines'for training personnel in document ' u ~
retrieval.
This'IPEP action (RP-17019) 1s closed.
_ , ,, -.: - < . ~ . 3; , ., ?17-1(10)VCommitneriti-Revise-Nuclear-Practice $andProced'ures(NPP)'to. '~ - f f
- . reflect changes.
, ,, v -
- g ~,'
m y ,~p,,m .., y x p,, ^ b e tatusi!, s M;QJiS The_NPPl Manual wasinot' revised. ' Corporate.
_.
a -' u 1; ~, D guida'nce willibe:provided under PEPS. Implementation " LM w. w - 3 Plan ~ D/P-1,3 '! Nuclear. Program Procedures'!. D/P_-1 m' =will'be monitored as RP-88015. :This'IPEP action.
~
/ _ , J .(RP-17110) is closed.
- . - J17-1(11)[ Commitment': ~ ' (Detiermine. requirements: for new-I&RM-system.
' y N 3 ^
- Status:
The requirements.were determined prior to'the W,- IPEP and are embodied in the.DEC VAX 11/780; ' K hardwa're'and' DATA BOSS /4 software.
This IPEP.
. 44 6 -, eactioni(RP-17111) is closed.
s k . -. il7-1(12)1Commitaent: l ~ .. 1 Identify Conversion-Programming requirements.
y ' . , 'W s Vl Status: ^ : ~ The programming to change.from" DATA BOSS /2 and- - 1'~ DEC.11/70 to DATA BOSS /4 and DEC'VAX 11/780 were ' ~ identified. cThis IPEPfaction'(RP-17112) is closed.
c , M@,}, ' *17-i(13)-LCommitment':' Test new software; - sk - _ DATA BOSS /4 wasLtested. satisfactorily on.
. .!
- .
Statusi h.; c September 15; 1984. 'However, the' licensee then ,
y decided to enhance DATA-BOSS /4 to improve the , retrieval capability for additional documents -
~' v~ - , . , - ' associated with-the primary document.being ' ' - N g7 ~ reviewed.~_~ThisJIPEP. action-(RP-17113) is
closed and the inspector will follow the ' , . ~ -l progress of the software enhancement as an %. . lopen ites (346/65025-23).
" - . Y jl7-1(14) D ommitmenti Demonstrate new system-. features.
C ,. . . , - T ' Status: L0nAugusti6',;1984,.thenew.featuresof ? ,g y ' ~~' DATA 160SS/4 were demonstrated for primary users - . . - of-the records management' system. This IPEP ' ,
' ' action'(RP_-17114) is closed.- ' g [ lt Dur'ing the review,of areas.No. 8 and No. 10, the inspector noted that.
i ". ' procedure designations and approvals-did not reflect past organizational i X i changes in the Nuclear Licensing and the Nuclear Training Departments.
' , . In the late summer ofc1984,-the Nuclear Training Department was removed s , , r 48-
, . 'N ' ,,- ~t.. , m_.. _. _ _
- < s 7(
~ ~ ~ (; c , -
u e ( . -, ', .c ' e3.
fromtheNuclearServicesDivisionandhlsced'undertheAssistantVP, ' ~ ' ' sNuclear. LA August 31,D1984,_ memo from the Assistant.VP, Nuclear; Nuclear ~ , W
- Services: Director. and Quality Assurance. Director stated that until
^ %" l alternate; documents were developed for the training department,'all ' 'W current procedures would continueLto be~ issued and controlled:in the-
- Nuclear Services Division Procedures' Manual.. In March 1985 the Nuclear
~ LLi_ censing ~ Department wasTtransfe* ed from the Nuclear. Services Division to ,7 cthe_ newly formed Nuclear'Licens?.g!and Safety Division.
Nuclear licensing ~- Mr procedures.are.still controlled'as Nuclear Services procedures even though- - ' ' ~ Clicensing no.. longer. reports to the-Nuclear Services Director.
' 1 Reestablishment:of-proper procedural approvals,-designations and work . 1 scopes for2these. areas'and any other: areas realigned following the June-19, 1985,1 event. tis considered an open item (346/85025-24).
. ^M11. Monthly Surveil'1ance Ob'servation-- l
- The" inspector Ibserved technical specific'ations. required surveillance
' ' - ftesting on the Waste Gas Systemi.ST'5072.00, " Channel' Calibration of ~ > Waste Gas Oxygen / Hydrogen Monitor"; and verified that testing was . ,. performed in accordance:withLadequate procedures ~, that test instruments 'were calibrated,3thatflimiting conditions for operation were met,ithat s ~ removal:and restoration ^of the Affected;: components were accomplished,
- - that test results conformed with: technical specifications and procedure ~ requirements and were reviewed by~ person'elLother than the individual n , ~ directing the test,'andlthat_any deficiendie's' identified during the- , W
- testing were properly. reviewed and resolved by' appropriate management.
~ '
- personneln :The Oi/0 monitoriisia model 7218/8248 manufactured'by EX0
~
. SENSOR...The.H ' monitor is non:TST 'Some: difficulties wereiencountered in
,- Lthe Og test. yThe alarm annunciator and computer-point were alarming a_'~ L elow setpoint.
Prints were reviewed and a Drawing _ Change Notice.(DCN).
b . ' twas-issued to correctithe 0 /H monitor output relay contact wiring. The 2 2 i.0 monitor: test was completed: satisfactorily after th'e. wiring changes-2were made.' :During: testing the H indicator moved downscale when test-gas
'was' introduced.- Drawing roview revealed that the wiring'.(wire. color ~ code) nomenclature used by;the~ manufacturer was di.fferent from.the~ , 74z . licensee's., A DCN was. issued >and the wiringichanged. -The H. monitor
d$b (responded with;an upscale indication approximately twice the test. gas W * _specificationl*iDiscussions with-EX0 SENSOR. revealed that this'was a - trecurring_ problem that required ~a. modification. The sensor circuit was- _ 7 modified:and the.H2 monitor wasitested satisfac'torily.
ST 5072.00 fully Emeets TS:4.3.3.10 requirements'. , ' s - h ~ ~ The-inspector also' witnessed portions of the following test activities: ' ~ iST=5044.01,fInspection~of Safety-Related Hydraulic Snubbers ~. EST 5061.02,; Containment Vessel Local LeakLRate Test Thelinspector' witnessed sections of local leak rate testing of
w iPenetrations:25,.34'and 8A and 88.- The observationscare presented below: , MJ 37, 'M @ a n
.
49 , . ., +
U . At-i J(a). Containment Spray Line, No.'25.
While setting up to test the . ~ penetration the flow meters and pressure indicator were oscillating , . , [ at 68-psi.
It'was determined that the pressure regulator was - mal functioning..The regulator was replaced and the test completed.
< - isatisfactorily. The licensee dete mined through discussion..with the I & C technicians:that these oscillations ~had-not occurred on , _ previous' tests'with the same regulator.
'(b) Containment' Vacuum Breaker Lines, No. 8A and No. 88.
No problems twere noted.
. -(c) Containment Vessel Purge-Line, No. 34. * During the establishment of - ' .the test pressure the line~was overpressurized to 80 psi.
38 psi < m is the. maximum allowed by the procedure.. The. licensee had expected the penetration to take approximately 10 minutes to p'ressurize-to 138; psi from. previous experience.
However after.four minutes the . penetration was at 80 psi. The licensee immediately reduced the pressure and initiated a Deviation Report on the situation.
Later
- the penetration was tested at the proper pressure and no leakage was observed..An analysis was conducted to determine if-any damage was
' incurred to the penetration, valves or the seals.
The analysis concluded that no damage was incurred.
12.
Independent Measurement of Reactor Coolant System Leakage 1Theiinspector;v'erified the reactor cooling system (RCS) inventory balance . i was performed according to the Technical Specification and within the limiting conditions'for operation.- The licensee's calculation technique for RCS-leakage determination was verified and. inadequately checked against NUREG-1107, "RCSLK9:. Reactor Coolant System Leak Rate Determination for PWRs". The licensee's procedure ST5042.02.9, "RCS.
. ' Water Inventory Balance", uses' the plant's process computer for leakrate ' -determinations with a manual calculation method provided when the computer is out~of. service. The procedure contains adequate instructions-to' maintain the plant in a steady condition and excludes water sampling during performance of the test.
Comparison between the process computer calculations and the NUREG-1107 program were within'O.2 gpm.
These results verified the adequacy of the licensee's computer calculation . technique. 'The licensee's RCS leak rate program fully meets the intent -
c_f Technical Specification 3.4.6.2.
13.
0 pen' Items Open' items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which ~ .will.be reviewed further by the inspectors, and which involve some action = on the part of NRC or licensee or~ both.
Open items disclosed during the , . inspection'are discussed in paragraphs ^2, 4, 6 and 10.
, ,, .
<
- - - m.,. _ _ _._ . - - _.
n.
~ - , ,, . , '- .. _. , - 9 f n: o . - - , - . y W:: ' ' ;- i / " .s' % ~ l '*"' j -- k
1.E i.,1 'Q't ,
- _
s + * y, t.. ~ ( '; 's . ' ' 14.[Unreso10edItems: - ' ' ' aq *
a - .- =- ! ", ' Unresolved; items ~'are matters;about whichimore'informa' tion is required in- ~ ' t ~ = order to ascertain _whether they are acceptableLitems, violatio'ns or ' ~ . ^
' ideviations.1::Unresolveditensidisclosedduringthe_inspectionare ! m - discussed:in paragraphs 3-and'4;
,
-
l15?. : Exit't Interview 3 Y
s z,,
.
!y'
- -
.
<
,
, ;,:
+,.}-
,,
f
{
'
gThefi.nspector[metwithilicensee: representatives-(denoted 1in' Paragraph 1)_
_
<
ithroughoutjthe month'and at the conclusion of the inspection and
_
,
~
'
-
.
- summarized theLscopecand findinfsfof-the inspection tctivities.
The'. l _ , , .. ' - 111 censee : ac knowl edged ; the : fi ndi r.gs. After-discussions with the ; licensee;- ~ - ttheninspectors -have-determin_ed there is no proprietary data ~ contai_ned in
- thisiinspectionireport.
' ' ' - s , , I ^ , - -. , < w- ' -: .
,_ ' -
' , a. p
}.y s _ y
- b';
, ' <<> g.
p'
- .
~ ,' ..
- .
. - _.
hei ' - ( .
- h
^ +, l ' 9%= - ^ .e . - . V, 'I - k.." h ^ f,' hi . y , }l l
. w % ' s ,
5
t
, .s - j f ., _ g., - , & , , he;- ,f _ f '
- -'f- - ' y \\ _ ^ ^ }: ' ., _, . ',hNA'.' k :OV, _
' .,: _ m - ' - ' .I _'4--
- , . : _, - T f
.?I _ r4 9.' - ' , , e , f , j% .. x , ' '
- _ _ ! _- > ". , ' " .51- . .m
- s,
- - - ~ ' -:-V
,, , }}