IR 05000528/1993046
| ML20058H289 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1993 |
| From: | Ang W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058H276 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-93-46, 50-529-93-46, 50-530-93-46, NUDOCS 9312130041 | |
| Download: ML20058H289 (12) | |
Text
~
.
~
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
,
~
REGION V
j Report No.:
50-528/93-46, 50-529/93-46, and 50-530/93-46 Docket Nh:
50-528, 50-529, and 50-530
,
license No.:
>
Licensee:
Arizona Public Service Company Facility Name:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station l
Units 1, 2, and 3
,
Inspection at: '
Palo Verde Nuclea'r Generating Station, Wintersburg, i
.
l
-
Inspection date:
September 13 through October 8, 1993 and October 25 - 29,
-
1993
.
Inspectors:
M. Royack, Reactor Inspector J. Winton, Reactor Inspector
.
.
ll-d - 9 3 b
Acoroved by:
W. P. Ang, Chie'f Date Signed
!
~
r Engineering Section
_
-
,
-
,
,
Inspection Summary:
,
Inspection durino the ceriods from September 13 throuah October 8.1993 and October 25 throuch 29. 1993 (Report Nos. 50-528/93-46. 50-529/93-46. and 50-
-
530/93-46)
,
Areas Inspected:
,
This inspection reviewed three areas. Two of the areas were the
'
licensee's implementation of the erosion corrosion, and inservice inspection (ISI) programs. The ISI inspection included a review of ISI of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 welds and a review of licensee Unit 1
steam generator eddy current inspection activities.
The inspectors also
.:
reviewed the licensee's corrective actions for licensee event report
.
(LER) 50-528/89-012-L2. NRC inspection procedures 49001, 73753, and
!
92700 were used as guidance for this inspection.
Safety Issues Manacement System (SIMS) Item
,
None
!
9312130041 931119 DR ADOCK 05000528 PDR
'
.
-
.
.
.
-
_
_
.-
.
.
r
-
Details
-
-
,
,
1.
Persons Contacted
r Arizona Public Services Company
- W. Ahlstrom,- Engineer, Inservice Inspection and Testing
,
- J. Bergstedt, Senior Technical Specialist, Quality Assurance and i
Monitoring
>
R. Bouquot, Supervisor, Quality Assurance and Monitoring
- T. Cannon, Supervisor, Inservice Inspection and Testing S. Fakhar, Supervisor, Site Mechanical Engineering Department
- R. Fountain, Supervisor, Quality Assurance and Monitoring D. Garchow, Manager, Site Mechanical Engineering Department
- B. Grabo, Supervisor, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs
- W. Ide, Unit 1 Plant Manager
- D. Kanitz, Senior Engineer, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs
.-
- W. Montefour, Senior Coordinator, Management Services
- W. Payne, Erosion Corrosion Engineer, Site Mechanical Design Engineering
- F. Poteet, Senior Engineer, Inservice Inspection and Testing l
- J. Provasoli, Senior Engineer, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs
- R. Schaller, Steam Generator Project Manager
- J. Chin Shih, Senior Engineer, Site Mechanical Engineering Department
- D. Smith, Unit 1 Outage Manager
- R. Stevens, Director, Regulatory Affairs
Others
- F. Gowers, Site Representative, El Paso Electric
- R. Henry, Site Representative, Salt River Project
.;
- J. Draper, Site Representative, Southern California Edison
-
l The inspectors also held discussions with other licensee and contractor personnel during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those persons attending the exit meeting on October 29, 1993.
,
'
- Denotes those persons attending the exit meeting on October 8, 1993.
2.
Erosion Corrosion (49001)
Backaround A previous NRC inspection (Report Number 50-528/93-24, dated July 30, l
1993) of licensee erosion corrosion procedures and activities identified a deficiency in guidance for NDE inspectors. Specifically, licensee
procedures did not provide NDE inspectors guidelines for documenting
,
flaws or anomalies found in carbon steel pipe during erosion corrosion inspections.
Inspector Actions l
,
The inspector reviewed licensee procedures, erosion corrosion ultrasonic
._
_
._
__
-
/
.
-
.
'
.
.
l
' thickness inspection reports, and observed selected licensee ultrasonic verification re-inspections of components. The review of procedures,-
'
test reports, and observation of re-inspection of components was
!
performed to verify that the licensee had been implementing the erosion
. corrosion program in accordance with HRC requirements (Generic letter 89-
-
08) and licensee procedures.
I The inspector also reviewed licensee erosion corrosion NDE inspector
'
certification records, calibration of NDE instruments and records,
-
engineering and technical staffing, and management support of the erosion
,
corrosion program.
.,
Procedures and Record's
.
,
'
The inspector reviewed licensee erosion corrosion program and non-destructive examination (NDE) procedures used to implement the erosion
-
corrosion program. The inspector reviewed procedures 81AC-0RA02, Erosion
-
Corrosion Administrative Control, Revision 2, dated October 22, 1993, 81DP-0RA02, Erosion Corrosion Department Procedure, Revision 3, dated
'
October 223,1993, 73TI-0ZZO2, Ultrasonic Thickness Measurement, Revision 05.00, dated September.1, 1993, and 73TI-0EE02, Erosion Corrosion
Monitoring, Revision 04.00, dated September 4, 1993.
>
The inspector reviewed erosion corrosion NDE reports and records for four
!
Unit I components performed ~during the Unit 1 Refueling Outages 3 and 4.
'
The records reviewed were for main turbine reheat steam piping components, M023-18-02, M032-18-02, and high pressure feedwater heater i
down stream control valve reducers E153-08-02, and E189-08-02. The inspector reviewed licensee minimum wall thickness evaluation
calculations, and repair recommendations for compt <nents M023-18-02, and
'
E153-08-02. The inspector also observed, reviewed, and compared data for
licensee verification re-inspections of components M023-18-02, and E153-
08-02.
The inspector found that the licensee was performing non-destructive
examinations (NDE) of piping and that the results of the examinations were being evaluated for repairs in accordance with licensee procedures noted above. The inspector also found that licensee procedure 73TI-OZZO2, Revision 05.00, included guidelines for NDE inspectors for documenting flaws or anomalies found in carbon steel pipe during erosion
>
corrosion inspections.
The inspector found that the data obtained from the NDE verification re--
'
inspection, of two components observed by the inspector, were consistent with data obtained by the licensee during post-repair and routine erosion
,
corrosion inspections.
i NDE Inspector Certifications The inspector reviewed erosion corrosion HDE inspector qualification and certification records for two licensee and four licensee contractor personnel.
~
.
+
-
i
.
~
,
,
The inspector found that the qualification and certification records for the licensee and contractor erosion corrosion tide inspectors were current and that the inspectors were qualified to perform ultrasonic (UT)
examir.ation level II thickness measurements.
,
.
f4DE Eouipment Calibrations
The inspector reviewed UT instrument calibration records for the four
'
components reviewed above. The inspector also observed the calibration of the UT instrument used to perform the verification re-inspection of
.
'
component M023-18-02, an eighteen inch diameter ninety degree elbow in
'
the reheat steam line and. component E153-08-02, a six by eight inch pipe
!
reducer in the seventh sta_ge feedwater heater normal drain line.
The inspector found th't calibration records for the UT equipment used to -
.
a inspect components M023-18-02, M032-18-02, E153-08-02, and E189-08-02
~
'
-
indicated that the equipment had been pre-inspection calibrated and post test calibration checked in accordance with licensee procedure 71TI-OZZ02.
The inspector observed that during the verification, re-inspection of r
'
components M023-18-02 and E153-08-02, the licensee's 14DE inspector had performed pre-inspection calibration and post inspection calibration checks in accordance with licensee procedure 71TI-0ZZ02.
)
-
Staffino and Manaaement Support The inspector interviewed licensee erosion corrosion staff, reviewed
staffing charts, and Site Mechanical Engineering Departments (SMED)
-
'
budgets for the erosion corrosion program. The interviews, staffing
-
charts, and budgets were ruiewed to determine if management had provided
-
and scheduled future support, both manning and financial, for. the erosion-
t corrosion program.
'
,
The inspector found that the licensee's erosion corrosion program had budgeted for and staffed two dedicated design engineers, one full time
field engineer /t4DE inspector, and for refueling outages, four contract liDE inspectors to implement the program. The inspector noted that one of the design engineers responsible for the implementation and administration of the program had been involved in the program for
!
'
greater than five years. The other design engineer position was a
>
rotational assignment from the inservice inspection and testing (ISI/IST)
'
'
group. The inspector noted that the rotational assignment was established to ensure that the licensee had several site engineering
,
personnel knowledgeable of the erosion corrosion program. The inspector
'
also found that the licensee's fide inspector position was a full time funded position.
The inspector reviewed th; licensee's Site Mechanical Engineering Department's fiscal year 1994 budget for erosion corrosion. The
inspector found that licensee management had scheduled funding to support
,
the erosion corrosion program which included allowances for program scope j
t i
. -.
,
i
~
k
_
~
~
-
.
!
.
,
.
expansion inspection changes. The inspector also noted that the budget j
i for the erosion corrosion program had increased as the projected l
inspection scope increased.
Conclusion
'
!
'
The inspector concluded that the licensee had been implementing their erosion corrosion inspection program in accordance with procedures and i
NRC Generic Letter 89-08. The inspector concluded that the licensee had
!
included NDE inspector guidance for documenting flaws and anomalies identified during NDE erosion corrosior, inspections. The inspector also concluded that licensee management had provided funding and
,
'
administrative support for the erosion corrosion program.,
No violations or deviations of NRC requirements wdre identified.
l i
3.
Inservice Inspection - Observation of Work Activities (73753)
>
Purpose and Backaround
'
,
The purpose of the inspection.in this area was to observe a sample of ISI l
work activities in progress in Unit I to determine if ISI inspections of American Society of Mechanical Engineers' (ASME) code Class 1, 2, and 3 pressure retaining components were being performed in accordance with applicable requirements.
The inspectors also reviewed Unit I steam generator tube eddy current testing.
Section 4.0.5 of the Palo Verde Unit 1 Technical Specifications required
,
that inservice inspection (ISI) be performed in accordance with Section
!
XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and
.
Pressure Vessel Code (Code) and applicable addenda.
In a NRC letter dated October 21, 1987, the NRC accepted the licensee's ISI program,
which was based on the 1980 Edition of the ASME Code,Section XI, with
'
Addenda through winter 1981. The Code inspection requirements are the basis for inservice examinations and tests conducted during the initial 120 month of commercial operation inspection interval.
,
.,
Inspector Actions
>
.;
The inspector reviewed licensee inservice inspection (ISI) schedules for
the period of this inspection. The inspector also reviewed qualification j
and certification records for licensee and licensee contractor personnel who were observed performing ISI examinations during this inspection.
The inspector selected three ultrasonic examinations, and a visual and
,
liquid penetrant examination for observation. The three welds selected j
for ultrasonic test (UT) inspection were on the coolant charging system i
regenerative heat exchanger which is a American Society of Mechanical i
'.
-
-
-
.
.=
-.
-.
-
-
l
.
i
,
f
,
Engineers ~(ASME) code class 2 component. The liquid penetrant and visual
!
!
inspections were for the coolant charging system regenerative heat exchange welded support. The welds required visual and liquid penetrant
,
'
inspection for the coolant charging system regenerative heat exchanger support.
The inspector reviewed licensee procedures 73TI-9ZZO9, Ultrasonic Examination of Pipe Welds, Revision 06.01, dated August 20, 1993, 73TI-l 92207, Liquid Penetrant Examination, Revision 3, dated December 27, 1993,
and 73TI-9ZZ18, Visual Examination of Support Components, Revision 05.00, dated September 4, 1993. The inspector found that the procedures were
,
the current revisions and were the procedures required to perform the assigned inspections.
-
_
l
.
'
~
The inspector observed a licensee contract NDE inspector perform calibrations of the ultrasonic test equipment. The inspector observed that the NDE inspector had performed calibration of the instruments in
,
the shop, and prior to performing inspections at each weld area. -The
inspector also observed that the licensee NDE inspector performed a post weld inspection calibration check of the ultrasonic test equipment upon
,
completion of inspection of each weld area. The inspector found that the i
licensee contract NDE inspector had performed calibration of the
.
+
ultrasonic test equipment in accordance with licensee procedure 73TI-9ZZO9.
'
!
The inspector observed the licensee contract NDE inspector perform ultrasonic weld examinations of three welds on the coolant charging
'
system regenerative heat exchanger.
The inspector observed that the
'
licensee's contract NDE inspector had performed and recorded ultrasonic inspections of the welds in accordance with licensee procedures. The NRC
-
.
inspector found that the licensee NDE inspector had evaluated the results in accordance with Article IWA-3000, Standards for Examination
.
'
Evaluation, and NB5330, Ultrasonic Acceptance Standards, of ASME Section XI Code.
The inspector observed two licensee NDE inspectors perform visual and
~;
liquid penetrant examinations of four welds on the coolant charging system regenerative heat exchanger support. The inspector observed that the licensee NDE inspectors had performed and recorded the visual and
liquid penetrant weld examination in accordance with licensee procedures,
"
73TI-9ZZ07, Liquid Penetrant Examination, Revision 3, and 73TI-9ZZl8, Visual Examination of Support Components, Revision 05.00. The NRC
.
inspector visually inspected flaw indications on the coolant charging
>
system regenerative heat exchanger support welds. The inspector found that the licensee NDE inspectors accurately documented and evaluated the indications. The NRC inspector found that the licensee NDE inspectors
had evaluated the indications in accordance with Article IWA-3000, Standards for Examination Evaluation, NB5350, Liquid Penetrant Acceptance Standards, and table IWB-3514-3, Allowable Planar Indications, of ASME -
Section XI Code.
-
The inspector reviewed qualification and certification records of l
-
i
. - -.
.
-.
..
.
.
-
l-
.
-
[
!
I
-
~
j
~
i
-
.
6-
_
!
-
i personnel obs'erved conducting ISI examinations during this inspection.
The NRC inspector found that the licensee inspectors were qualified and i
certified for level II examinations and the licensee contract inspector i
was qualified and certified for level III examination activities under American Society for Nondestructive Testing Standard SNT-TC-IA.
i
f Conclusion
'
The inspector concluded that the licensee had performed the observed ISI weld examinations in accordance with licensee procedures and that the
licensee was implementing their approved ISI program. The inspector also
concluded that licensee personnel o' served performing the ISI weld o
,
examinations we' e appropriately qualified and performed ISI examinations r
in accordance with licensee procedures.
-
,
l No violations or deviations of NRC requirements were identified.
l
~
Unit 1 Steam Generator Tube Inspections
!
-Backaround and Purpose During the period of this inspection the licensee conducted extensive eddy current inspections of the Unit I steam generators during Unit I
Refueling Outage Number 4.
The licensee's inspections were being
'
,
performed to determine if there existed steam generator tube problems in l
Unit I similar to those at Unit 2.
'
The NRC inspector reviewed licensee eddy current procedures, observed eddy current inspections, reviewed eddy current inspection scope changes
,
and analysis, management oversight, and licensee contractor efforts. The
-
e NRC inspection was performed to determine if the licensee and licensee contractors had been performing inspections, data analysis, and
.
l
inspection scope changes in accordance with licensee procedures.
l Inspector Actions
,
Procedures The inspector reviewed licensee procedure 73TI-9RC01, Steam Generator
Eddy Current Examinations, Revision 9, dated September 28, 1993.
l Licensee procedure 73TI-9RC01 was reviewed to determine if requirements i
for bobbin coil and motorized rotating pancake coil (MRPC) eddy current
data analysis and evaluation had been defined. The inspector also
,
reviewed the procedure for equipment calibration criteria, bobbin coil and MRPC data discrepancy resolution criteria, and if particular flaw-indications expected in certain areas of the steam generator had been identified.
The inspector found that specific requirements for bobbin coil and
'
motorized rotating pancake coil eddy current data analysis and discrepancy resolution had been defined in Appendix A of the procedure.
,
The inspector also found that equipment calibration and particular type
i
.
_
-
.
_
.
-
-
.
,
of flaw indications for each section of each steam generator area had
~
been defined in procedure 73TI-9RC01.
.
Observations The inspector observed licensee activities at eight MRPC and two bobbin
,
'
coil data acquisition stations to determine if the licensee had been performing and recording data in accordance with licensee procedures.
l The inspector reviewed eddy current test equipment calibration records.
The inspector found that the licensee had been performing the bobbin coil and MRPC eddy current steam generator tube examinations in accordance
!
with licensee procedures. The inspector also found that the licensee had been recording data on approved data sheets and that eddy current
~
>
inspection equipment calibrations had been performed and were being i
.
checked in accordance with procedures.
The inspector observed activities at four data analysis stations. The-inspector found that each of the four stations had a current Analysis
'
Technique Sheet (ATS). The inspector noted that the eddy current
,
i operator was utilizing frequencies and mixes specified on the ATS sheet for eddy current testing analysis in accordance with procedure 73TI-9RC01.
t
[
r Conclusions The inspector concluded that licensee procedure 73T1-9RC01 included requirements for bobbin coil and motorized rotating pancake coil (MRPC)
eddy current data analysis and evaluation. The inspector concluded that the procedure also included equipment calibration criteria, bobbin coil and MRPC data discrepancy resolution criteria, and descriptions of particular flaw indications expected to be found in certain areas of the steam generator tubes.
,
The inspector concluded that licensee personnel had been performing steam
.
generator tube eddy current inspections, data recording and data analysis in accordance with licensee procedures.
No violations or deviations of NRC requirements were identified.
l Samplino Methodoloov and Expansion Criteria Inspector Actions The inspector reviewed the licensee's Unit I steam generator sampling methodology inspection plan. The inspection plan was reviewed to determine if the licensee included inspection expansion criteria, i
historical steam generator data from licensee inspections and other utilities, cnd loose part monitoring.
The inspector found that the licensee's Unit I steam generator sampling plan had included criteria for expanding the inspection scope. The l,
q
_
_
!
-
!
_
-
-
.
,
inspector noted thit the licensee's inspection plan had included:
<
!
100% bobbin coil inspection of the approximately 12,000 tubes in the
two Unit I steam generators, l
100% MRPC inspection of all hot leg tubes in the top of tube sheet
~ *
area,
- .
20% sampling of the tubes in the arc area from the first vertical
support to the 08H support, and 20% sampling of the tubes outside of the arc of interest (determined
!
by analysis to be an area that is most susceptible to mid-span axial
'
cracks) in the sludge area from the t~ube sheet expansion to the ~
i first vertical support on the hot leg side.
~
.
'
The inspector also found that the licensee's inspection plan included previous tubing indications found in Palo Verde steam generators, i
problems identified by other utilities, vendors, and the NRC. The i
inspector noted that the plan had included previous steam generator indications.
,
'
The inspector found that the inspection and expansion criteria used in the inspection plan was based on the licensee's experience with previous i
'
Unit 1 and 2 steam generator inspections.
'
f Conclusions j
The inspector concluded that the sampling methodology used to develop the
!
inspection plan included the areas necessary to provide information needed to ascertain the condition of the steam generators tubes. The
-
inspector found the expansion criteria used to be satisfactory.
.
No violations or deviations of NRC requirements were identified.
Licensee NDE Inspector and Analysts Oualification l
1pspector Actions The inspector reviewed licensee qualification and certification
.
requirements for steam generator eddy current inspectors and data analysts. Licensee requirements for steam generator eddy current
inspectors were included in licensee procedures and 73TI-9C01, Steam
Generator Eddy Current Examinations, Revision 9, dated September 28, 1993, 73AC-0EE04, Qualification and Certification of NDE Personnel,
,
Revision 01.03, dated June 27, 1993.
The inspector reviewed approximately fifty eddy current and analysis personnel qualifications. The inspector found that licensee and
contractor personnel qualification and certification records were up to date and that the inspectors or analysts were qualified in accordance
_
-
.
'
~
l
.
.
.
.
t
'
'
_ 7 i
~
with licensee procedures 73TI-9C01 or 73AC-0EE04. The inspector also
'
found that the licensee and contractor inspectors were certified level I.
II, or III in accordance with American Society for Hondestructive Testing l
Standard SNT-TC-1A.
.
.
t Conclusions
,
'
i The inspector concluded that the licensee and contractor inspectors and
,
I analysts were qualified and certified in accordance with licensee procedures.
No violations or deviations of NRC requirements.were identified.
,
Manaaement Oversiaht of Vendor Data Acouisition and Analysis Personal' and
-
Enaineerina Support of Steam Generator Inspection Proaram
,
Inspector-Actions
'
The inspector observed licensee _ oversight of licensee and vendor data dCQuisition and analysis personnel.
The inspector observed that licensee management personnel continuously monitored licensee and contractor inspector and data acquisition and i
analysis personnel.
The inspector observed that licensee management personnel routinely
.
.
attended and observed daily meetings between data analysis and engineering groups. Managements oversight of these meetings provided l
assurance that licensee procedures and license conditions and
.
,
requirements were met.
i e
Conclusion
The inspector concluded that the licensee had provided management oversight and control of steam generator eddy current inspections, data
.i acquisition, and analysis.
,
4.
Onsite Review of Non-Routine Events (92700)
(Closed) Licensee Event Report (LER) 50-528/529/530/93-012-L2 "Emerr ncy
,j Lichtina Deficiencies"
,
Backaround l
Licensee event report (LER) 50-528/529/530/89-012-L2 reported that on May 10, 1989, the licensee determined that emergency lighting in Unit 2 did not meet Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station design bases or 10 CFR 50,
-
Specifically, twenty four areas had been Appendix R requirements.
,
identified that required installation of, or modification to, lighting in i
order to be able to perform required safe shutdown activities assuming a fire in the control room concurrent with a loss of off-site power.
It l
~
.was also reported that similar conditions existed in Units 1 and 3.
j
,
)
>
--
.
-
>
-
-
d b
~
t licensee Co"rective Action ~s
~
l The licensee performed emergency lighting system walkdowns and prepared documentation to install or modify emergency lighting.
The licensee installed or modified emergency lighting to correct ligtting deficiencies.
The licensee updated the facility Design Basis Manual to state that
'
emergency lighting was required to support operation of safe shutdown equipment as well as to provide access and egress to the equipment.
The licensee revised procedure 81DP-4CC05, Des 4n and Technical Document control and 81DP-0DC03, Final Engineering, to require a technical review when incorporating changes to the emergency lighting system.
The purpose of the review was to ensure that adequate illumination associated with safe shut down equipment was maintained.
,
NRC Inspection of Licensee LER Corrective Actions
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Design Basis Manual, Revision 0.
,
The inspector found that the emergency lighting (QD) section of this
-
manual stated that emergency lighting was required to be adequate for operating safe shutdown equipment as well as to provide lighting for access and egress to the equipment.
The inspector reviewed licensee procedure 81DP-0CC05, Design and
';
Technical Document Control, Revision 01.05, dated September 3,1993, and 81DP-0DC03, Final Engineering, Revision 02.05, dated July 7,1993.
Procedure 81DP-0CC05 referenced procedure 81DP-0DC03 for emergency lighting system (QD) reviews. The inspector noted that procedure 81DP-.
,
ODC03 stated that a emergency lighting system (QD) technical review was i
required prior to incorporating any changes to the emergency lighting (QD) system.
,
Thi inspector reviewed drawing 01-E-ZPL-04, Revision 4, dated March 11, -
1993 and section I.B of the LER. The inspector found that thirty three emergency lights in each unit had been installed or modified as a corrective action. The lighting additions or modifications were initiated in response to licensee walkdowns and reviews of the emergency-i lighting system (QD). The inspector visually verified the installation of i
twenty of the thirty three lighting fixtures in each unit (total of 60
lighting fixtures for the three units). The inspector found that the lighting fixtures had been installed and that they illuminated their
-
specific safe shutdown equipment, the access or egress to the equipment.
Of the sixty emergency light inspected, the inspector noted that three
dual lights were not specifically aimed at their designated target. The l
i licensee noted the deficiencies and stated that corrective actions to re-
aim the lights would be taken.
!
Conclusion The inspector concluded that the licensee had revised the Design Basis
I h
,
-
_ _
- - -
.
.
.-
_
.
.
!
l
~
i
.
.
,
.
-
^
,
!
Manual to state that emergency lighting was required to support operation
!
'
of safe shutdown equipment as well as to provide access and egress to the equipment. The inspector concluded that the licensee had revised L
procedure 81DP-0DC03 to require a technical review of the emergency.
lighting system prior to the incorporation of any changes to the emergency lighting (QD) system.
The inspector also concluded that the licensee had installed or modified l
emergency lighting fixtures to illuminate specific safe shutdown i
equipment or the access or egress to that equipment.
This item is closed.
~
~ :
No violations or deviations of NRC requirements were identified.
._
-
>
5.
Exit Meetina The inspectors'Eonducted exit meetings an October 8, and November 29, 1993, with members of the licensee staff as indicated in Section 1 of this report. During this meeting, the inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection activities and reviewed the inspection. findings as described in this report. The licensee acknowledged the inspectors'
findings as identified in this report.
At the conclusion of the exit meeting the inspector requested that the licensee identify any proprietary information which needed to be returned l
to the licensee. The licensee did not identify any proprietary
!
information which had to be returned to the licensee.
-
-
i
~
l
!
!
!
!
,
!
f l
,
.
i l
-
.
.-..
.- --
..
..
. -
-