IR 05000373/1987008
| ML20212K973 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1987 |
| From: | Phillips M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212K959 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-87-08, 50-373-87-8, 50-374-87-08, 50-374-87-8, NUDOCS 8703100008 | |
| Download: ML20212K973 (22) | |
Text
1
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION Ill Reports No: 50-373/87008(DRS);50-374/87008(DRS)
Docket Nos. 50-373; 50-374 Licenses hc. NPF-11; NPF-18 Licensee: Cons.crvecith Edison Corr.pany Post Office Box 767 Chicage, IL 60690 Facility Narre: LaSalle County Nuclear Station, Units crd 2 Meeting Location: Region III Office, Glen Ellyn, IL Meeting Conducted:
February 2 987 6!O Prepared By:
lTips, Chief Operational Programs Secticn Late 2/2 4[f 7 Approved By:
C. W. Hehl, Chief Operations Branch Late Meeting Sumary
[e3.nesses identified'Tn~1he~Tnse,rWc)e,;TestTng (ISIT(~
1987 (Reports No. 50-373/8700E(CRS Meeting on February 20
~
Subjects Discussed:
Tnspection conducted at LaSalle County Station, Units and 2, and decurrented in Inspection Reports 50-373/86029(DRS)and 50-374/860K(DRS); and the licensee's corrective acticns to upgrade their IST program.
,
f
"
G703100008 870227ADOCK 05000373i PDR PDR _
O
..
-
. -. -
-
- _ - _. -., _
_ -
..
-
. - -
- -
..
.
.
- -
-
-
-
.-
.
. - _.
-
's
.
DETAILS 1.
Attendees Connonwea,lth Edison'Compa_ny C. J. Diederich, Station Manager i
L. F..Gerner, Regulatory Assurance Superintendent -
D. J. Scott, Operaticns Manager, Nuclear Stations Department
.
T. A. Hamerich,JTechnical Staff Strervisor-R. W. Stcbert, Station Cuality Assurance Superintendent R. D. Bishop, Services Superintendert H. S. Turbak, Operating Plant Licersing Director C. M. Allen, Licensing Administrattr, LaSalle R. D. Sagmoe, IST Coordinatcr D. W. Zebrauskus, ISI Engineer, Station Nuclear ens neering Departr.ent i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission C. W. Hehl, Chief, Operations Branch R. F. Warnick, Chief, Reactcr Prefects Branch 1
.
H. P. Phillips, Chief, Operational Progratis Secticr.
M. A. Ring, Chief,. Projects Section IC P. L. Eng, Resident Inspector, Zior N. V. Gilles, Projects Inspector J. A. Malloy, Resident Inspector, LaSalle 2.
Areas Discussed:
'
-Mr. Hehl stated that the purpose of the teeting was for the licersee to
discuss the corrective actions implemented for the violations identified
-
during the IST inspection and to describe the associated program upgrades
. designed to address the identified weaknesses.
Mr. Phillips presented a brief description of the issues which were found during the previcus IST inspection. Attachrent 1 is a copy of the cverhead which was used to rake this presentation.
i The licensee presented a detailed description of the current IST prograr., including the corrective actions that had been initiated
!
I subsequent tc the.IST inspecticn. The handcuts used for this The licensee l
presentaticr. are included as Attactrent 2 to this report.
stated that it was their intent to upgrade their IST program tc the
. point where it would be the best ir. ReSicn III, ard that they welccmed any added suggestions to improve their program. The major points of i
the licersee's presentation are cutlined in the attachnient.
!
The IST Ccordinator new had the respcnsibility for reviewing surveillance evaluations and corpleted strveillarces for acceptability, as well as his previous duties of prcgramatic responsibilities. The trending of data would still be dcte by the test engineers. The scal for completion of the entire strieillance package from collection of data to conpletion of all evaluaticos and reviews had been estchlished
-
.
--
-. -..
, - _ - _ -. - - -
-- - ~
-.-.- - -
-_ -
i
.
at seven days. The Operation or Maintenance Departments were still responsible for icctdiate resolution of any required acticr range data.
All strveillance esalbations required by the ASME Secticr XI progrars would be conducte.d by both the Departrient ar.d the Techrical Staff, with review by the apprcpriate Department Head and Technical Staff Supervisor.
Evaluations would be included ab part of th serveillance packages for completeness.
With regards to spcial tests, all would be reviewt.d t3 tre Techrical Staff Supervisor tc ensure that IST equipreent v.culd recebe an IST type of special test.
In addition, to improve the quality cf the evaluations perforred, all system engineers had been tr6ir.cd on what needs to be includec in an evaluation to ensure that it was conplete and the conclusicts reached in the evaluation were justified.
Licensec representctives f r.dicated that they did r.ct feel that the attitude of perscrrel had been casual toward the IST prcyat, but that there had been a 1ct of confusion in the requirements erc stat the program demanded, anc that this confusion may have led tc a false impression.
The final topic discussed relatec tc the timing of wher. a Technical Specification Acticr Statement clock began if a suruiliar.ce performed indicated that the equipment fell ir.tc the required acticr. range.
Although there was uniform agreeraent that if a Technical Spcification requirement such as flow rate or discharge pressure was rct ret, the Action Statement c1cck be. san at the time the data was cc?lected, this was not the positicr taken regarding IST required acticr. rarge data.
The licensee represer.tatives felt that in the case where a surveillance was performed, ar.d the surveillance included data which fell intc the required action rarSe, the system or con.pcnent would net te declared incperable, and tht.s start the Action Statement clock Lrtil the evaluation was ccr;1ete and the evaluation deterrained that the ccrponent or syster was inoperable, rather than at the tire the data was collected. The NRC representatives indicated that ttis issue would be forwarded to fJJ. for resolution. The lice.nsee was rerfoded that in the ir.terim, hRC would expect prudent action be taken when equipter.t fell inte the required actica t a r.ge.
The meeting was ccr:luded with NRC surr.arizing that the ;rcgram described during +Je meeting by the licensee shctld address the ider.tified concerns, but that the final determination as to its adequacy would be reserved pending implen.entation of the program.
Attachrcnts:
1.
NRC Presentation cr.
LaSalle Inservice Testing Issues 2.
LaSalle IST Prograr - February 20, 1987
. -
..
-
_
. _ _
_ _ _ - _ _ _
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-.
.
_
_
'
..,
~
LASALLE INSERVICE TESTIflG ISSUES
.
.
DOCUMENTATION, QUALITY, AND CONTENT OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS FOR OFF-NORMAL
i DATA WAS POOR, WITH TORMAL TECH STAFF REVIEW PERFORMED ON AVERAGE OF ONE MONTH AFTER IEST COMPLEllUN.
I DESPITE THE FINDINGS OF THE PREVIOUS INSPECTION EFFORT IN THIS AREA, CORRECTIVE
ACTIONS WERE NOT CONSISTENTLY IMPLEMENTED.
i USE OF "SPECIAL TESTS" FOR OPERABILITY DETERMINATION TENDED TO FOCUS ON TECHNICAL
SPECIFICATION OPERABILITY DEFINITIONS WITHOUT CONSIDERING INSERVICE TESTING CODE
'
i REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERABILITY DETERMINATION (THIS POINT APPEARS IN RESPONSE To j
VIOLATION 3),
i
.
ATTITUDE APPEARED TO BE CASUAL TOWARDS INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM, ITS PURPOSE,
AND ASSOCIATED REQUIREMENTS.
DESPITE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE IN PREVIOUS SALP REPORT, EVIDENCE OF INCREASED
MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT RELATED TO THE INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM AND ITS
'
RELATIONSHIP TO EQUIPMENT OPERABILITY DETERMINATION WAS NOT EVIDENT.
CONTINUED PROBLEMS WITH FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROCEDURES, BOTH IN THE FAILURE TO
j COLLECT REQUIRED DATA, AND IN THE USE OF NON-PRESCRIBED INSTRUMENTATION.
I
,
i l
!
!
I
.
_.
_
_
.
.
.-
__.
_
_
- :
-
.
.
.
.
W AGENDA LASALLE IST PROGRAM - FEBRUARY 20, 1987 INTRODUCE PROGRAM
-
,
Discuss VIOLATIONS IMPROVEMENTS IN SYSTEM t
o l
.
i s
DOCUMENT ID 0661K
...
-. -
.
....
-.
.
_.. _ _.... _. _ -. _ _ _ _. - _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _. - _, _. _ _,. _
.
-.
-
.
..
.
..
.
..
,
..
s
.
BACKGROUND PROGRAM BASIS 10CFR50.55A(G)
LICENSE CONDITIONS 2.C.(9) AND 2.C.(4)
.
.
>
l e
DOCUMENT ID 0661K
. -
..
, - - _ - -
. _.
- _ __. _ _., _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _
, _ _ _
4,
.
_
__
._
_
.-
- c LSCS PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ADMINISTRATION TECHNICAL STAFF
.
OPERATING DEPARTMENT MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENTS i
J DOCUMENT ID 0661K
..
_. - _,.. _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ -.
.
.
.
.
_
. -
.. -
-.
-
.
..
.
.
.
,
+
TECHNICAL STAFF COORDINATOR OF PUMP AND VALVE PROGRAM DUTIES
- PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
- INITIAL PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
- PROGRAM MAINTENANCE - MODS
- REQUIREMENTS CHANGE
- PERIODIC REVIEW
- COGNIZANT OF STATUS OF IST PROGRAM
- NRC SUBMITTALS
- RELIEF REQUESTS
- PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
- MONITORING 0F PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING:
- REVIEW 0F SURVEILLANCE EVALUATIONS l
- REVIEW 0F COMPLETED SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE SURVEILLANCES FOR ACCEPTABILITY l
!
- SURVEILLANCE IMPLEMENTATION l
- SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE ADEQUACY
- SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE SCHEDULE l
i bOCUMENT ID 0661K
_. - _ _ _
_ _. _ _
-.
-.
-
..
.
_-
_ _. _ _. _. _, -
-
-
.--
.
.
COGNIZANI ItCHhiCAL STAFF ENGINEERS TEST SCHEDULING AS PART OF OVERALL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM PERFORMANCE OF SURVEILLANCES LEAK RATE TESTS
'
VALVE EXERCISING TESTS I
REVIEW 0F TEST DATA (5YSTEM ENGINEERS)
.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR EVALUATION OF TESTING DATA TRENDING OF TESTING PARAMETERS
-<
DOCUMENT ID 0661K
.
,,
-.
.--
-_-- -.
_ _. _ _ _ - -
. -.
-
.-
.
-. -, _. -.
..
... _ _.. _. _..
..
.. _.
.. _. ___;. _ __
.__
.
,
'3
..
a
' \\.
,,
I,
'
,
.
'
,
.
-
,
.,
,
,
.s
,
.
,
"
/
,
se%
OPERATING AND MAINTFNANCE DEPARTMFNT,$
-
-.
<
m.
-
.
..
,
j
\\
, '
-
,
-
,
y
.
,
PERFORM SURVEILLANCES.
-
-
,
'
.
-
,
L SCHEDULED.
,
'
.
RETEST AFTER REPAIR.
,
.
REVIEW RESULTS AND'IN1.jTIATE CORRECTIVE 2fCTIONS AS
)
,
APPROPRIATE.
.
l
i a
REQUEST ASSISTANCE OF TECHNICAL STAFF OR OTHER STATION
., :
DEPARTMENTS AS NECESSARY.
,
\\
l
.
-
i I
I I
,
,
.
'
.
,
- s
,
,
,
i
..
DOCUMENT ID 0661K
-. _ -... _ - - -. _ - _, - -. _ - - -
..
. -
- -. - - -..
.. - - -
.... - -
.. - -
.
..
1986 IST INSPECTION
.
373/86029. 374/86030
.
THREE VIOLATIONS (LEVEL IV)
,
,
f
i
'
,
l l
t l
l L
I DOCUMENT ID 0661K l
---.~...
_ _ _ _ _,. _ _ _ _ _ _
- ""
W**
"
^*mw-
,.y,-w y
,,,
,
.
,
.
PROBIEM
'o INCREASE 0 FREQUENCY TESTING WAS NOT PERFORMED AFTER THE UNIT'2 RCIC PUMP ENTERED ALERT RANGE (VIBRATION).
'I',
CONCLUSIONS EVALUATION CONCLUDING INCREASED FREQUENCY TESTING
UNNECESSARY WAS INADEQUATE.
PUMP WAS FULLY OPERABLE AT ALL TIMES AS VALIDATED
BY SUBSEQUENT PERFORMANCE.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
'
PROCEDURE LTF'-600-4, "ASME SECTION XI IN-SERVICE TESTING'0F PUMPS AND VALVES," WAS REVISED TO REQUIRE IST COORD;NATOR TO REVIEW SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE SURVEILLANCE EVALUATIONS FOR ADEQUACY.
>
.
A NEW EVALUATION FORM WAS INCLUDED-IN PROCEDURE g
~ LAP-100-29, " CONDUCT AND REVIEW 0F STATION
"
SURVEILLANCES," (NEW PROCEDURE) T0:
-
' PROVIDE FOR A MORE DETAILED EVALUATION PROCESS.
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF REVIEW
-
PROCEDURE LAP-220-4, " DEGRADED EQUIPMENT LOG," WAS REVISED T0:
'
!
REFER SPECIFICALLY TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
'
4.0.5 AND ASME SECTION XI.
USE LAP-100-29, SURVEILLANCE EVALUATION.
,
REQUIRE EQUIPMENT IN " REQUIRED ACTION RANGE" T0 BE ENTERED IN DEGRADED EQUIPMENT LOG.
t
-
dbCUMENTID0661K
,
.
- -
,
,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
.
.
LAP-100-29 Revision 0 January 12, 1987 7 @flet)
I ATTACHMENT B
'
SURVEILLANCE EVALUATION ATT:
PROCEDURE NUMBER:
,
TITLE:
'
/
DATE OF SUEVIILIANCE (start date/ time):
DEGRADED EQUIPfer! LDG ND.
REAscN rom EVAL aTIcs:
.
.
DEPARTMENT EVALUATION:
i
.
DEPARTIENT ACTIGI TRIGN:
__
.
/
~
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUESTED RESULTS OF EVAL 2 TION:
_
EVALUATOR:
/
ACTION R4UIRED:
,i
_
/
TECH STAFF SUPV:
DEPARTMENT ACTICBI TlWGN:
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
/
DOCUIENT ID 0530&/0492A
-
- - _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
<
,
PROBIFM A PRESSURE GAUGE OTHER THAN THAT SPECIFIED
IN PROCEDURE WAS USED TO COLLECT IST DATA TO SUPPORT PUMP OPERABILITY.
DOCUMENTATION WAS UNAVAILABLE TO SUPPORT
PROPER MEASUREMENT OF VIBRATION VELOCITY FOR THE UNIT 2 RCIC WATER LEG PUMP FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENT OF IMPELLER CLEARANCES.
CONCLUSIONS
.
FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROCEDURE (EVIDENT IN BOTH
EXAMPLES) IS UNACCEPTABLE.
GENERAL STAFF KNOWLEDGE OF IST REQUIREMENTS NEEDS
IMPROVEMENT.
PUMPS WERE FULLY OPERABLE AT ALL TIMES AS
VALIDATED BY SUBSEQUENT PERFORMANCE.
I DOCUMENT ID 0661K
__ _ _
_._
___
_ _ _ _, _..
_
_-
- __
_ _ _ _ - _ _ - _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
..
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETE AND ACCURATE DOCUMENTATION AS WELL AS ADHERENCE TO PROCEDURES WAS REEMPHASIZED TO OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL STAFF PERSONNEL.
THE.IST COORDINATOR CONDUCTED TRAINING SESSIONS ON THE GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE ASME SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE PROGRAM.
PROCEDURE LTP-600-4, "ASME SECTION XI IN-SERVICE TESTING OF PUMPS AND VALVES," WAS REVISED TO REQUIRE THE IST COORDINATOR TO REVIEW COMPLETED ASME SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE SURVEILLANCE DATA FOR ACCEPTABILITY LAP-100-29 STATES "THE USE OF INSTRUMENTATION, OTHER THAN THAT IDENTIFIED IN THE SURVEILLANCE, IS DISCOURAGED.
IF IT IS NECESSARY, AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION MUST BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO TAKING CREDIT
,
FOR THE ACTION OF THE SURVEILLANCE."
A NEW SURVEILLANCE COVER SHEET WAS INCLUDED IN PROCEDURE LAP-100-29 To:
DOCUMENT REASON SURVEILLANCE WAS PERFORMED.
DOCUMENT ASSESSMENT OF RESULTS.
DOCUMENT ADDITIONAL ACTIONS TAKEN AND SPECIFY IF FURTHER ACTIONS ARE REQUIRED.
PROVIDE FOR SURVEILLANCE REVIEW SIGNATURES.
PUMP SURVEILLANCE DATA SHEETS ARE BEING REVISED TO FACILITATE PROPER COLLECTION OF REQUIRED DATA (ESPECIALLY VIBRATION DATA).
DOCUMENT ID 0661K L
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..
,
LAP-100-29 R. vision 0 January 12. 1987
ATTACHMENT A STATIQti SURVEILIJOICE CDVER PAGE UNIT 0 / 1 / 2 ATTACIG erT:
KEASON FOR SURVEILLANCE PROCEDIEE NUISER:
_ SCHEDULED DE53IPTItal:
/
W.R. #
1ATERT EEV VERIFIED:
_
Set Number Init Date MOD #
ALERT RANGE TESTING
/
START DhTE/TIIE:.
FINISH DATE/TIIW:
/
BASELINE DATA OTHER COWLETI PARTIAL INCOMPLETE Cors erTE:
.
(Continue ColetENTS on additional page as necessary)
PERPWIED BY:
/
/
/
/
tafIT IND (OPS DEPT OblLY)
,,
ACTION TREEN: Work requests written to resolve unsatisfactory results. *
W.R. #
surveillance UNSATISPACTCRY. Complete retest required. Tech Spec
_
equipment declared INOPERABLE and recorded in the Degraded Equipment Log.
Parameter (s) in the ALERT Range - Evaluation required.
(Att. B)
Parameter (s) in the REQUIRED ACTION Range but Tech Spec requirements for operability are met,
'
Parameter (s) in the REQUIRED ACTION Range and Tech Spec requirements c
are not met. Equipment declared INOPERABLE.
'
Instrument (s) other than that called for in the procedure were used.
NO ACTIOli REQUIRED: _Jurveillance is satisfactory.
_
DEL Entry required l_l NO l_j YES DEL #'s SURVEILLANCE REVTEV GROUP LEADER (TS)
/
ScRE/PCREMAN DEPARTIENT SURVEILLARICE SCHEDULE UPDATE (initial if required)
/
TREW EIEU.Y1BT (if required)
ASIE/ISI action required
/
/
Person /Date/ Time notified:
(Evaluation provided on Attachment B)
/
DEPART!ENT HEAD (Tech Spec related)
/
SYSTER ENGINEER (as required)
DOCUfel! ID 0530A/0492A
--
..
- -
LOS-HP-Q1 t *
y Rsvision 17
.,
DictmbIr 4, 1985
ATTACHMENT 1A UNIT 1 HIGH PRESSURE CORE SPRAY SYSTEM OPERJdi;*ITY AND INSERVICE TEST VIBRATI::N POINT LOCATIONS SHEET
.
-
I I
I
w N
r
/
O W IJ
'
@
-
HPCS PUMP b
-
EPN: lE22-C001 LOCATION: 673' E3 SV
_
'
CORNEE RCCM
.
-
.
-
..
I!
5I l
u #i n u
-
@
.
g
'
\\
I I g],,
@
-
T
- : --
_._
..;
v
a
\\(V>
':-6 I
-
,
VIEV FROM SUCTION SIDE OF P;MP.
,
l l
.
@
@
.
!
I HPCS WATER LEG PUMP EPN: lE22-C003
"
o q
-
-
,
'
h O
M (
Corner Rocc
"
,
,
l
_
';
<
j
.
--
-
~
<
,
.
"
I,h i
'
)
v
~
l i
L.
%
/
C'
f
'
I s
DOCUMENT 02530/0097A
-
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - __
_ _ _ _
_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
f
.
LOS-HP-Q1
,
Revision 18 ATTACHMENT 1A UNIT 1 HIGH PRESSURE CORE SPRAY SYSTEM OPERABILITY January 21, 1987
..
'
AND INSERVICE TEST SIGN-OFF SHEET OBSERVED OPERATOR PARAGRAPH CONDITJQNS INITJM,4
.. NUMBER
.
...... DESCRIPTION / LIMITS __.._.. _ _
_
ol'HN
.
F.ll.e IN// P0;14 and IN// Fil.l:t
. _.
,
__
-_
__
ASME XI F.12 HPCS Pump Vibration Hornpil Alert Range Rec. Action Vibration s.314 in/sec .314 in/sec
>.628 in/sec Instrument to.628 in/see IDS
i Point in/sec.
Coupling Area horizontal in/sec.
Coupling area axial in/sec.
Coupling area horizontal in/sec.
Lower motor brg. horizontal in/sec.
Lower motor brg. axial in/sec.
Lower motor brg. horizontal in/sec.
Upper motor brg. horizontal in/sec.
'Jpper motor brg. axial in/sec.
,
!
Upper motor brg horizontal F.13 System walkdown for integrity complete.
RegglLeh_Co_ndition (T.S.6.2.F.1.a)
No Leakage or document in comments F.14.b HPCS Pump Minimum Flow Bypass E_1 pal Position Valve F012 Opens (T.S. Table 3.3.3-2)
CLOSED
<
F.15 Suppression Pool Level Required Value (T.S.)
26'10" to 26'2.5" (+3" to -4 1/2" at panel IPM13J)
Note in conds. 4 & 5 how T.S.3.5.2 is met.
i F.16.a If in refuel condition, remote
N/A position indication verification i
l on IE22-F012 (ASME XI)
!
DoctlMMNT O?$'lo/0097A
,
i
-
.
i.
,
PROBLEM ECCS PUMPS HAD THE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE OUTSIDE THE REQUIRED ACTION RANGE (HIGH) WITH LOW SUPPRESSION POOL LEVEL AND WERE NOT RETESTED WITHIN 7 DAYS OF RESTORING SUPPRESSION POOL LEVEL TO NORMAL.
CONCLUSION
'
JUSTIFICATION FOR CONCLUSION THAT HIGH DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE WAS DUE TO LOW SUPPRESSION POOL LEVEL WAS NOT ADEQUATELY DOCUMENTED.
.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AT LOW POOL LEVELS PUMPS WILL BE DEEMED OPERABLE BASED ON TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FLOW AND PRESSURE REQUIREMENTS.
PUMPS WILL BE VERIFIED IN NORMAL OPERATION RANGE WITHIN 7 DAYS OF RAISING POOL LEVEL TO NORMAL.
!
l l
i DOCUMENT ID 0661K
_
. - -
_ _ _ - _ _.
. -
_
_
.___.
._,.__ -
_-, _.
...
. s -
OVERVIEW IMPROVEMENTS IN SYSTEM
.
INCREASED MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF ASME SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE PROGRAM (IST PROGRAM) IMPLEMENTATION.
.
TECHNICAL STAFF SUPERVISOR WILL APPROVE POST MAINTENANCE TESTING SCOPE FOR WORK REQUESTS WHICH PERFORM WORK ON 1ST PUMPS.
SURVEILLANCE DOCUMENJATION PACKAGE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO INCLUDE:,
REASON FOR PERFORMANCE OF THE SURVEILLANCE.
ASSESSMENT OF RESULTS.
ADDITIONAL ACTION REQUIREMENTS:
AFFECTS SURVEILLANCE RESULTS.
USE OF ADDITIONAL INSTRUMENTS DISCOURAGED:
ENGINEERING EVALUATION REQUIRED PRIOR TO TAKING CREDIT FOR SURVEILLANCE.
DOCUMENT ID 0661K
_
_
_. _. _ _ - _ _ _ _. _ _
-. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,
- _ _ _ _. _., _ _ _ _, _ _ _
r
-
, r -
TECHNICAL STAFF PERSONNEL KNOWLEDGE LEVEL ON IWP/IWV REQUIREMENTS HAS BEEN UPGRADED.
IST OVERVIEW PROCEDURE (LTP-600-4) HAS BEEN REVISED TO:
REQUIRE IST COORDINATOR REVIEW 0F SURVEILLANCE
EVALUATIONS REQUIRE IST COORDINATOR REVIEW OF COMPLliED ASME
SECTION XI PUMP AND VALVE SURVEILLANCE TEST DATA.
OUTLINE PROGRAM AND CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUMP
'
VIBRATION DATA.
PROVIDE GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR REVISING
OR WRITING INSERVICE TESTS.
.
SPECIAL TEST (LST) PROCEDURE HAS BEEN REVISED TO REFERENCE IST PROCEDURE.
THIS WILL ENSURE THAT PROPER TESTING METHODS ARE USED AND SUFFICIENT DATA IS YAKEN TO MEET ASME SECTION XI REQUIREMENTS.
EVALUATION PROCESS AND DOCUMENTATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED.
REVISE EVALUATION FORM.
REVISE DEGRADED EQUIPMENT LOG PROCEDURE.
REVISE TREND ANALYSIS PROCEDURE.
REQUIRE IST COORDINATOR TO REVIEW EVALUATIONS FOR ADEQUACY.
i
,
D}CUMENT ID 0661K
-,. j --.
SUMMARY:
LSCS PROGRAM IS SOUND BUT NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS: PARTIC-ULARLY WITH REGARD ~TO DOCUMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW, IMPROVEMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE AND ARE CONTINUING.
.
.
I
4 i
DOCUMENT ID 0661K