ML17053C945
| ML17053C945 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1981 |
| From: | Doerflein L, Sharon Hudson, Kister H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17053C942 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-220-81-27, NUDOCS 8112010546 | |
| Download: ML17053C945 (30) | |
See also: IR 05000220/1981027
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE
OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Report No.
81-27
Region I
Docket No.
50-220
License
No.
Prior ity
Category
Licensee:
Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation
300 Erie Boulevard West
Syracuse,
13202
Facility Name:
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit
1
Inspection at:
Scriba,
Inspection conducted:
October 1-31,
1981
Inspectors:
S.
D. Hudson,
Resident
Inspector
L. T. Doerflein, Res dent Inspector
ti
9'ate signed
9
Ev
ate signed
Approved by:
date sig
ed
H.
Kister,
ef,
R
Sec ion
1C
ctor Projects
a esig
ed
Ins ection
Summar
Ins ection
on October 1-31,
1981 (Ins ection
Re ort No. 50-220/81-27
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, onsite regular
and backshift inspections
by the
ress
en
snspec
ors
(145 hours0.00168 days <br />0.0403 hours <br />2.397487e-4 weeks <br />5.51725e-5 months <br />).
Areas inspected
included:
licensee
action
on previous inspection findings, operational
safety verification, physical
security, plant tours, surveillance tests,
maintenance activities, radioactive
waste shipment, safety
system verification, review of plant operations,
followup on significant events,
TMI action plan items,
and review of periodic
reports.,
Results:
Of the twelve areas
inspected,
no items of noncompliance
were
~i ent>1.>ed in eleven areas.
One item of noncompliance
was identified in one
e
area.
(Failure to log recirc
pump runback in the Control
Room Log Book)
Region I Form 12
(Rev. April 77)
I Sfi20f0546 Sffif3
ADOCK 05000220
"
., 8
~PDRQ
P
l
II
II
4
DETAILS
1.
Persons
Contacted
R. Abbott, Supervisor,
Operations
K. Dahlberg, Site Maintenance
Superintendent
J. Duell, Super visor, Chemistry
and Radiation Protection
E. Leach, Superintendent
of Chemistry
and Radiation
Management
R. Orr, Supervisor,
Nuclear Security
T. Perkins,
General
Superintendent,
Nuclear Generation
T.
Roman, Station Superintendent
B. Taylor, Supervisor,
Instrument
and Control
P. Volza, Emergency Planning Coordinator
The inspector also interviewed
and talked with other licensee
personnel
during the course of the inspection including shift
supervisors,
administrative,
operations,
health physics, security,
instrument
and control,
and contractor personnel.
2.
Licensee Action On Previous
Ins ection Findin s
(Closed)
UNRESOLVED ITEM (220/78-03-01):
Changes
to procedures
to
incorporate inspection findings.
The inspector
reviewed the following
procedures
to verify that the changes
had
been- completed.
a ~
b.
Nl-ST-C5, "Secondary
Containment
Leak Rate
and Reactor
Building
Ventilation Operability Test," Revision 3, dated
March 6, 1981.
This procedure
was revised to specify the local gages
as the
source, of the data
and to record the data in the proper units.
Nl-ST-M4, "Emergency Diesel Generators
Manual Start
and
1 Hour
Rated
Load Test," Revision 8, dated
June 25, 1981.
This procedure
has
been revised to specify the minimum diesel fuel oil requirements
in the acceptance
criteria section of the procedure
and to verify
operation of the fuel oil transfer
pump.
c.
Nl-ST-gl, "Core Spray
Pumps
and Motor Operated
Valves Operability
Test," Revision 8, dated
June
10, 1981.
This procedure
has
been
revised to include monitoring the differential temperature
across
the core spray
pump motor cooler to certify cooler operability.
d.
Nl-ST-DO, "Daily Checks,"
Revision 7, dated
September ll, 1981.
This procedure
was revised to include the acceptable
numerical
values for the Suppression
Chamber Water Temperature,
Primary
Containment
Pressure,
and the Downcomer low and high submergences
in conformance with the Technical Specifications.
(Closed)
UNRESOLVED ITEM (220/78-21-05):
Inclusion of reporting
requirement
reference in LER cover letter.
In September
1979, the
licensee started to identify the particular reporting requirement in
the
LER cover letter.
The inspector reviewed the cover letters for
LER's 79-19 through 81-43 and noted that all cover letters contained
the reference
and description of the specific reporting requirement.
III
h
I
tl,'
=t
1
h
'P
U
I
1
1
EV1
)
Pt EUP -
I
I
-I
U
~
'
t
t
UEEP
"t I', 'I
I
J IP
11
11
fe
1
~
n
U
I'
=l
P
Ef th )
h
I
h,,
It
',
ll
I )
It " I
11
)I
<<
I
'
\\
<<
"E
I
t)
1
'h
'h<<
t
~
tl 0
ll
V
'V
I
I
, ~
hf
e
<< I'Ph
I
- Il
UI f
<<
I
ft
J
<<
)IVVI
l) (
Eh )t
'I
I
- , ),E
~ e
1
fl h)<<g,
I
I
)
I
t*t
I
'h p
tl I
E
P
I
~
t ft
~
~
IIIWI
lt ) ) g
I
)
)
)<<W
F
If,
P
I <<II
I
I lll
ti
h
E
F
"
E )IV f It'
'I'V
'I,
tf
tll)
tl
1'
'
<<
t
~
F
P 'I
11
1
<<
'llV'.
It
(I
1
E
U
1
P
I
~
~
h
he<<
Et
<<* 1
le) I
ti
I
P
ttf
<<P
h, t
I'le,( I,I
<<
. ~
)
I
'"
'f)
t
1
tf
I
<<W
V
I
sl
h
V
<<1
1
F
1
It
J
)
I
~
'll )
i
I Ut
E t
E'f 'th ~
I
1
(Closed)
INSPECTOR
FOLLOWUP ITEM (220/79-22-01):
Operation with
less than four recirculation
pumps.
Amendment
No. 39, effective
December
12,
1980, revised the Technical Specifications to specify
plant restrictions with less
than four operable recirculation
pumps.
(Closed)
UNRESOLVED ITEM (220/80-05-04):
Inconsistency in Nl-SOP-17
and Nl-OP-12 on the Standby Liquid Control System
(SLCS).
Special
Operating Procedure
No. 17,
"Emergency Shutdown With SLCS," was
superceded
by Special
Operating
Procedure
No. 32, "Failure of Reactor
to Scram".
Nl-SOP-32 addresses
when to initiate SLCS and refers to
Operating
Procedure
No. 12, "Liquid Poison System," for operation of
the system.
(Closed)
UNRESOLVED ITEM (220/77-04-06):
Traversing incore probe
shear valve squib replacement.
The inspector
reviewed maintenance
procedure
Nl-IMP-TIP-2, "Explosive Shear Valve," Revision 1, dated
February
1978,
and verified, based
on a record review, that the shear
valve squibs
were replaced
on February 22, 1978.
Using Nl-IMP-TIP-2,
the shear valve squibs
are replaced
every five years,
and the removed
are test fired to ensure they were operable.
(Open)
UNRESOLVED ITEM (220/80-01-03):
Revision to Markup procedure.
The licensee
has drafted
a proposed
change to APN-7,"Procedure for
Control of Equipment Markups,
ETC."
This item remains
open pending
- approval
by the Site Operations
Review Committee
and subsequent
NRC
re-inspection.
3.
0 erati on Safet
Verification
a ~
Control
Room Observations
Routinely throughout the inspection period, the inspector
independently verified plant parameters
and equipment availability
of engineered
safeguard
features
against
a plant specific checklist
to ensure
compliance with the limiting conditions for oper ation (LCO"'s).
The plant specific checklist
has
been
developed to assist
the
inspector in ensuring the following items were observed:
'roper control
room manning;
Availability and proper valve line-up of safety systems;
Availability and proper alignment of'onsite
and offsite
emergency
power sources;
Reactor control panel indications
and bypass
switches;
Core thermal limits;
Primary containment temperature
and pressure;
Drywell to suppression
chamber differential'ressure;
Stack monitor recorder, t'races;
and
Liquid poison tank level
and concentration.
1
I
I
'
Q
I )
I ~
lA
l
~
I 'I
'II
'4 ";, I
"I
II
M I
p'l lt 'I Ij l
~ it
'" 4')
jjj)
)'l
'I I'
M
$
I
I,
MM) If
Il
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MI
I
~
~
.It ~"),'"
'VI i'IV*'tt
)VN I
I!
I
I
I
'III 4
~',.
4
I
4c
f
it
I,II
V
-
MM
~
C)
f
I,'
tl
. ) I
~t
)l
II
IM'~h
I I'I[ 'I
V
I
IM
I
V'
'I
~
Ijt
I( P I
lg
VV')"
1
I
II
l, ~
P)
l 'V)
~
)
jj I
I
4 tl
)
I
'I
l
Selected lit annunciators
were discussed
with control
room
operators
to verify that the reasons for them were understood
and corrective action, if required,
was being taken.
Shift turnovers
were observed to ensure
proper control
room and
shift manning
on both day and back shifts.
Shift turhover
checklists
and log review by the oncoming
and off-going shifts
were also observed
by the inspector.
The inspector directly observed portions of routine power
operations to ensure
adherence
to approved procedures.
b.
Review of Lo s and
0 eratin
Records
The inspector reviewed the following logs and instructions for
the period October
1 through October 31, 1981:
Control
Room Log Book
Station Shift Supervisor's
Log Book
Station Shift Supervisor's
Instructions
Licensee
Event Report
Log
Reactor Operating
Log
The logs
and instructions
were reviewed to:
Obtain information on plant problems
and operation;
Detect
changes
and trends in performance;
Detect possible conflicts with technical specifications
or regulatory requirements;
Determine that records
are being reviewed
as required;
Assess
the effectiveness
of the communications
provided
by
the logs
and instructions;
and
Determine that the reporting requirements
of technical
specifications
are met.
(0'ne item~ of noncompliance,upas
identi'fied. The item ys discussed
in
paragraph
11.
4.
Observation of Ph sical Securit
The inspector
made observations
and verified during regular
and
off-shift hours that .selected
aspects
of the plant's physical security
system were in accordance
with regulatory requirements,
physical security
plan and approved
procedures.
The following observations
relating to
physical security
were made:
The security force on both regular
and off-shifts were properly
manned
and appeared
capable of performing their assigned
functions.
Protected
area barriers
were intact - gates
and doors closed
and
locked if not attended.
I
')
~
"
d,.
4
td<<hl
<<
1
)'<<<<4
ff d
4
4
0
I ~ I
f
I
h
~ I 'I
0
il
~
I
,1 h,
~
"h
)I
Il,dl
4
h
I'I
1,1
1
0
1
4 jl
EI
0
0
If
<<0
I
I'
hr>>;,
t
ht tt
tf
I
I
0
~
I
,1,
0
4 I'"'<<) h
4d
I, t
I',
p
I
0
0
\\
d
ft
0"
, E'Eh *
II
I
~
HAMI
0
fl
tl
II
- 0'
IM
Communication
checks
were conducted.
Proper communication devices
were available.
Isolation zones
were free of visual obstructions
and objects that
could aid an intruder in penetrating
the protected
area
and during
periods of darkness,
the protected
area
had sufficient illumination.
Persons
and
packages
were checked prior to entry into the protected
area.
Vehicles were properly authorized,
searched,
and escorted
or
controlled within the protected
area.
Persons within the protected
area displayed photo-identification
badges,
persons in vital areas
were proper ly author ized,
and
persons
requiring escort were properly escorted.
Compensatory
measures
were implemented during periods of equipment
failure.
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
5.
Plant Tours
During the inspection period, the inspector
made multiple tours of plant
areas to make
a independent
assessment
of equipment conditions,
radiological conditions, safety
and adherence
to regulatory requirements.
The following areas
were
among those inspected:
Turbine Building
Auxiliary Control
Room
Vital Switchgear
Rooms
Yard Areas
Radwaste
Area
Diesel Generator
Rooms
Screen
House
Reactor Building
The following items were observed
or verified:
a ~
Radiation Protection:
Personnel
monitoring was properly conducted.
Randomly selected
radiation protection instruments
were
calibrated
and operable.
Area surveys
were properly conducted
and the Radiation
Work
Permits
were appropriate for the as-found conditions.
Radiation
Work Permits
(RWP) requirements
were being followed.
Personnel
monitoring was properly conducted.
Randomly selected
radiation protection instruments
were
calibrated
and operable.
h
I
II
h
I
F ~
II
ll
"PWII L-yt I
N
W h IW
'I'l <<
I!
h
t
j
W
h
I
ll
W
W'
W
~
It
l
W
l
I
tt
1
W*t
W
1 NL
N -h
W
I
~ h
a,'.,
L
I l<<
N
ll
II
<<W
Fl
W
W ~
~
I ~ "'
I
0
~ I
y'<<Wy
I>>
Wh
"I
I
h
NN)
~ N
II
l
W,', )
ll If f
l
I
~ ',,t
h,
~
<<
1
)hi
.
)W
I"
Radiation
Work Permit requirements
were being followed.
Area surveys
were properly conducted
arid the Radiation
Work Permits
were appropriate for the as-found conditions.
The inspector witnessed
the performance of radiation survey
f/59779 in the TIP room on October 9,
1981
and 860157
on the
Refueling Floor on October 29, 1981.
On October 29, 1981, the inspector noticed that
an air sample
taken at 1:35 p.m. for survey
860153
showed
an airborne activity
level of 25,535 percent of the
sum of the individual Maximum
Permissible
Concentration
(MPC) for each isotope detected.
The
major isotope present
was cobalt-60.
The air sample
was taken
in the Spent
Resin Tank
Room while shoveling resins that had
overflowed onto the floor.
Full face particulate filter type
masks
were worn as required
by Radiation
Work Permit 85377.
The
duration of the job was approximately
15 minutes.
Although a negligible amount of radioactive material
was ingested,
the inspector stated that the airborne activity could have
been
reduced
by wetting the resins prior to shoveling.
The licensee
acknowledged
the inspector's
concern
and stated that this
technique
would be investigated for future use.
The licensee
also stated that the individuals involved would receive whole
body counts.
b.
Fire Protection:
Randomly selected fire extinguishers
were accessible
and
inspected
on schedule.
Fire doors were unobstructed
and in their proper position.
Ignition sources
were controlled in accordance
with the
licensee's
approved procedures.
Combustible material
was promptly removed.
c.
Equipment Controls:
Jumpers
and equipment tag outs did not conflict with
Technical Specification requirements.
Conditions requiring the use of jumper s received
prompt
licensee attention.
Selected
jumper s had
been properly installed
and removed.
d.
Yital Instrumentation:
Selected
instruments
appeared
functional
and demonstrated
parameters
within Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for
Operation.
JWP
E,h II f
l
,El
r",
r
If
'
I
I'*,
4
4( ~
4
'
V
4
I
".4,)
~
'Vg f
VI,
E
I""
4
EE-E )
1
If
)
I
J
E
~
"
~
E
'
R'
,
~
fh I
4
4
4
Ri
pr
I
I
'r
~
~
4
4
I
1
hr
4
V
E
I
4
~ l
rnn
4
I
I
4
I ~
nrni
EE
I
1
4
4
~ I'
l
l'E
r
~
'l
II 4
)f
r'*,
n
'" R'ER
4
P
l
4
R
II)fl
I
E
)4')I
)I
4
/4
~
~
V
V
4
I
I,
R
v)v
E
~
~
7
e.
Radioactive
Waste
System Controls:
Gaseous
releases
were monitored
and recorded.
The inspector reviewed the Weekly Stack
Gas Isotopic Analysis
and Offgas Isotopic Analysis performed
on October
19 and 26,
1981
to determine that gaseous
releases
were periodically sampled
and did not exceed Technical Specification limits.
On October 8, 1981, the inspector witnessed
portions of the
loading of a cask with radioactive filter sludge.
The
shipment
was designated
by the licensee
as shipment 81081-037A.
The operation
was performed in accordance
with Waste Handling
Procedure,
WHP-4, "Cask Loading Procedure,"
Revision 0, dated
January
30, 1981.
f.
Housekeeping:
Plant housekeeping
and cleanliness
practices
were in accordance
with approved licensee
programs.
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
6.
Surveillance
Tests
During the inspection period, the inspector witnessed
the performance
of various surveillance tests.
Observations
were made to verify that:
Surveillance
procedures
conform to technical specification
requirements
and have
been properly approved.
Test instrumentation is calibrated.
Limiting conditions for operations for removing equipment from
service are met.
Testing is performed
by qualified personnel.
Surveillance
schedule
is met.
Test results
met technical specification requirements.
Appropriate corrective action is initiated, if necessary.
Equipment is properly restored to service following the test.
The following tests
were included in this review:
ST-M9, "Control
Room Air Treatment
System Operability Test,"
Revision 3, dated
March 2, 1981, performed
on October 9, 1981.
"Reactor Protection
System Auto Trip System Instrument
Trip Channel Test/Calibration,"
Revision 9, dated August 28, 1981,
performed
on October 16,
1981.
"A.P.R.M. Instrument
Channel Calibration," Revision 3,
dated
November 9, 1979.'he
inspector witnessed
the calibration
of channel
813 performed
on October 22,
1981.
~
Wv>>
I
~
-
~
.v'W
v
~
'>>'gf'Jf'M
',I
v 'kl,v'Wt>
1
","
'
"
"h,,
"v"
'.1
p)w
v
~
"~ '
h
I
'
- VII'II'>>'
lh
v
If 41
I j')PP"
f,l
'I
1 r ~
I
v
M
P
rffg "4!MM
n
I
I', tfk
"M
~
$f
'
'
h ~,
v
~
ft,. ',l 1'f
v
P
P
r
~
v
f
v
, M)
f
M
'
M
I '*'
",It'l
"MP.
Jl
fff
'vk
1'I,M
~,1
M
I
I
IP
vff" v
P
~
1 ~
v
P
,v
I Ih
t
V
P
'I
P
II
v
4
~
t
lll'Il
r
~ ~
I
ll
v
M
I,
v
I
"I
~
~
v
I
, vr
I
W
v
M
"Radwaste
Discharge to Tunnel Radiation Monitor
Instrument
Channel Calibration," Revision 1, dated
September
9,
1980, performed
on October 23,
1981.
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
'.
Plant Maintenance
The inspector
examined portions of various safety related maintenance
activities.
Through direct observation
and review of records,
he
determined that:
Redundant
components
were tested to ensure operability prior to
starting the work.
These activities did not violate the limiting conditions for
operation.
Required administrative approvals
and tagouts
were obtained
prior to initiating the work.
Approved procedures
were used or the activity was within the
"skills of the trade".
Appropriate radiological controls were properly implemented.
Equipment
was properly tested prior to returning it to service.
During this inspection period, the following activities were examined:
Pulling cable thru the Reactor Building wall elevation
237;
Repair of ¹11 Liquid Poison
Pump;
Troubleshooting the recirc.pump flow oscillation of October 22, 1981.
During the repair of ¹11 Liquid Poison
Pump, the inspector
independently
verified tagout
BMU ¹65744 had
been properly conducted.
After completion
of testing the repaired
pump, the inspector independently verified that
it was correctly returned to the normal standby condition.
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
8.
Radioactive
Waste Shi ment
On October 29, 1981, the inspector
checked
a shipment of radioactive
waste prior to its departure
from site.
The shipment
was designated
by
the licensee
as
shipment
¹1081-040A and consisted of 15.3 curies of
solidified evaporator
bottoms.
Specifically, the inspector verified that:
The shipment
was properly classified
as low specific activity material.
A radiation
and contamination
survey had
been conducted.
(Radiation
Survey
Log Sheet ¹60088,
dated
October 29, 1981)
and that applicable
limits had not been
exceeded.
An approved shipping container
was used.
The vehicle was properly labelled
as "Radioactive - LSA".
4
4
P
)
M
1
~
~
A
lt
~
I ~
4
4
I
4
Ih
M, \\
~
p
4
4
~
M
4 4
,I V,
~
lt
tl
4
4
4
I
4
I
4
4
lt
~
ll
14
I
t
tt
1I')
1
I(I'I
~
'
fft ~
~
4
ft
'4
)
1
I
'Lt]l
1
'I
II
I
4
e
44
I,
M
I
'4
P
II
'I
1
M
I
I
~ M
M
ffh
I
~
I
M
- I ~
~
ff
4
I
tt
4
4
4 tt
I
~
4
1
The Radioactive
Shipment
Record
had been properly completed
and
signed.
The shipping container
appear ed to be steadily braced for
transportation.
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
Safet
S stem
0 erabilit
Verification
On a sampling basis,
the inspector directly examined selected
safety
system trains to verify that the systems
were properly aligned in the
standby
mode.
This examination included:
Verification that each accessible
valve in the flow path is in
the correct position by either visual observation of the valve
or remote position indication.
Verification that power supply breakers
are aligned for components
that must actuate
upon receipt, of an initiation signal.
Visual inspection of the major components
for leakage,
proper
lubrication, cooling water supply,
and other general
conditions
that might prevent fulfillment of their functional requirements.
Verification by observation that instrumentation
essential
to
system actuation or performance
was operational.
During this inspection period, the following systems
were examined:
Containment
Spray System f12
Core Spray System
012
Control
Rod Drive Scram Discharge
System
The inspector
also conducted
a complete walkdown of the accessible
portions of the Liquid Poison
System.
In addition to the above items,
the inspector verified'hat the containment isolation function of this
system
was in the proper standby line-up.
This includes:
Manual valves are shut,
capped,
and locked as appropriate.
Motor operated
or air operated
valves are not mechanically
blocked
and power is available
as appropriate.
There are
no visual leakage
paths
between the containment
and the
isolation valves.
During the walkdown of the Liquid Poison System,
the inspector questioned
the licensee
on the purpose of a heat
lamp mounted
below the discharge
valve on the No.
11 Liquid Poison
Pump.
The licensee
stated that the
heat
lamp was
used to prevent the poison solution from crystallizing
when he
had experienced
problems with the electrical
heat tape
on the
No.
11 Liquid Poison
Pump.
The licensee
also stated that the lamp was
I ~,
'I
I h
tl
fr,if '
I'
m
~
pi'm
m .r,
'I) lt l
)
m
'
ll
t
I,
a
If
m 'llhi 'I
II
m
It
m
r
h
)
I
P
'I "rff I 'm,'I'
I
I
h
I\\
'
1
hr)r
P
hr
I
I
h
I
P
I
I
J
~ ',
P,
4',
n
1
I'
I
h
I
"1
P.
~
~
I
10
no longer required.
However, the inspector noted that based
on past
observations
and discussions
with other licensee
personnel,
the heat
lamp has apparently
been inplace for a time period of approximately
one year.
This item is unresolved until a determination is made
on
whether or not the operability of the Liquid Poison
System is dependent
on the heat
lamp.
(50-220/81-27-01)
10.
Review of Plant
0 erations
a.
Procurement
and Stora
e
The inspector toured the licensee's
warehouse
area to ensure that
safety related
components
are traceable
and that the area is
maintained
as required
by approved procedures.
The inspector
reviewed the following procedures:
APN-14, "Procedure for Control of Material
and Service,"
Revision 4, dated April 1981.
NMPC Materials
Management
Policies
and Procedures,
Appendix A,
Sections
1.0, 4.0, 36.0.
The inspector selected
the following items in the warehouse to
verify traceability by reviewing the purchase
order, receipt
records,
location of the item in storage,
issue record
and
certification record.
P.O.
73459, 3/4" and 1" Hancock globe valves
P.O.
76208, Liquid Poison Injection Valve Replacement
Kits
P.O.
94175, Various unions, tees,
and
reducers
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
b.
ualit
Control Ins ection
The inspector witnessed
a quality control inspection
performed
on
October 29,
1981
by the licensee's
quality assurance
organization.
The quality control inspection
was performed in accordance
with
guality Control Surveillance Checklist 8W81-01.
The inspector
also reviewed the personnel
records to 'determine that the licensee's
individual was qualified as
a Level I Inspector in accordance
with
ANSI 45.2.6, "gualification of Inspection,
Examination,
and Testing
for Personnel
for Nuclear
Power Plants".
A review of Surveillance
Report
8W81-22 will be performed
when issued
by the licensee.
(50-220/81-27-02)
No items of noncompliance
were identified.
~
il
<<
i,
hl
<<'I'!
"
I)
I l If<<h
h
~
il
'I>>"'"V)
!
V
~
t"
it>>
)lih )
~ t
V
>><', ).)
!it
v
VI.
'I
V
I
)
- ~
I
I,'r '~1 'll
h<<
h I
IL
~
~
V
'I
I
t" >>I"p
rh
~ l
VV<<l
h
h
<<
~
~
H
<<
t
V
<<
l,!
I
~
Vl I'
'g
~)
r
)
I
I
I <<
I )I
I
I
V
~
I p
'I
h <<)t>> '
<<
,
<<,y ". >>,;>>,I
I
~
l<<k'$~
11
followu
on Si nificant Event
About 12:00 noon
on October 22, 1981, the plant experienced
a sudden
decrease
in reactor recirculation (recirc) flow.
The inspector
reviewed the Reactor Operating
Log and appropriate
instrumentation
chart recorders to determine the sequence
of events.
The plant
conditions prior to the recirc flow decrease
were:
Reactor
power = 99K
Total steam flow = 15.6xl06 ibm/hr.
Total recirc flow = 63x106 ibm/hr.
Reactor pressure
= 1029 psig
All recirc
pump controllers,
except for recirc pump 814, were in master
manual control.
The chart recorder for total recirc flow shows
a sudden
decrease
of
9xl06 ibm/hr.
During the transient,
which lasted
about ten minutes,
reactor
power
dropped to approx.
83%, total steam flow to 14.3xl06 ibm/hr.,
and reactor pressure
to 1022 psig.
After recirc flow returned to its
initial value, the other parameters
also returned to their normal values
except for a slight overshoot in reactor
pressure to 1032 psig.
Because
the only installed chart recorder monitors total recirc flow,
the licensee installed
a temporary chart-recorder
to monitor flow from
each of the five recirc pumps to help isolate the cause of the event.
During the three
day period of observation,
no abnormal flow oscillations
occurred.
The inspector
noted that this event
was not recorded in either the Control
Room Log Book or the Shift Supervisor's
Log Book.
APN-2A, "Conduct of
Operations
and Composition
and Responsibilities
of Station or Unit
Organization", Section 4.1.1, states
in part:
" "Control
Room Log Book
shall contain all information pertaining, to changing core reactivity
during all modes of reactor operation ...
Also, entries affecting
Station outputs ..., unusual
conditions ..., etc. will be entered in
this log."
The failure to log the unexplained
change in recirc flow
and the accompanying
change in reactor" power in the Control
Room Log
Book is considered
to be
an item of noncompliance.
(50-220/81-27-03)
The inspector also determined that this event is not reportable in
accordance
with Technical Specifications
or. 10CFR50.72.
Licensee Action on TMI Action Plan Items
The inspector
examined the installation of several
recently completed
modifications required
by
NUREG 0737, -"Clarification of TMI Action Plan
Requirements".
The item numbers
correspond to those given in NUREG 0737.
4
4
I
I I
~ Wtl lf
h,l
~
It
4
I ~
H
'1
'll ~
~
I
}1
h
I'4
1 Lt
P
~,
t
~
W
tmil
hf
1
t,',
I
~
'I
4tuw
p
I
I
WWt I) tt
)
4 'll'I
4
4
~
4
I
it
I
tt
L"
~
h
W
'
1 "'W l
p
I
I
~'I
11
4
I
~
W
~
R
t
f
i'
IIutW
I
'4
1
lt'
4
4,
ft
,P fr
f
Il
C
'
~
~
114+
1)
t
4I
II
It
~, l
It
1
t
4
H
JH
~
1
If
m
H
~
4
~
1
4 ~ I
4't'4
I
~,I"
4
L'WR
4
4
ll
f
IS
tt t
4
4
4
It
'Hwt
u
I'
'g
R
4
-Ii'J '
a
H
'
It
t)4 ihl
Ii
I W*
.") L'W >.) ';
. W";,4, '
~
uW
w
H
'2
Item No. II.D.3, Direct'. Indication of Relief and Safet
Valve Position
During the March 1980 outage,
the licensee installed the acoustic
monitoring system to provide direct indicat'ion of each safety
and
relief valve.
This system provided only a
common annunciator
alarm
in the control
room which indicated that any of the valves
had opened.
During the
1981 refueling outage, individual computer points were
assigned for each of the six relief valves.
A common computer point
was assigned to all of the sixteen safety valves.
The individual
points for the relief valve and the
common point and for the safety
valves will alarm and print out on the process
computer.
This design
had been determined to be acceptable
by the Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
Therefore,
unresolved
item no. 50-220/80-18-01
is closed.
The inspector
reviewed 'ISP-01-VMS, "Valve Monitoring System Operating
Background Vibration," Revision 0, dated July 28, 1981, performed
on
July 29,
1981 to ensure that the operability of the computer points
had
been
checked after installation.
The inspector
noted that SOP-9,
"Solenoid Actuated Pressure
Relief Valve Opening," Revision 4, dated
March 30,
1981 did not reflect the acoustic monitor system input in
the process
computer.
The licensee
stated that the procedure
would be
changed
by December 1, 1981.
This item remains
open pending
NRC review
of changes to the above procedure.
Item No. II.E.4.2
Containment Isolation
De endabilit
The Office of NUclear Reactor Regulation
has determined that the
licensee's
position relating to diverse containment isolation signals
and automatic isolation of non-essential
systems is acceptable.
Therefore,
unresolved
item no. 50-220/80-18-02 is closed.
In a letter from D. Disc to T. Ippolito (NRC) dated January
30, 1981,
the licensee
stated that the automatic isolation valves in the
recirculation loop sample line and suppression
chamber to waste
system
line would not be completed until March 1, 1982.
This item remains
open pending
NRC review of the installation of the above valves.
Item No. II.F.1.4, Containment
Pressure
Monitor
The inspector
examined the wide range drywell pressure
instruments,
PPI-201.2-483
and 484 to determine if the licensee
had met the
commitments of hKs letter from D. Disc to D. Eisenhut
(NRC), dated
December
31, 1980.
The system consists
of redundant
pressure
transmitters,
indicators,
and recorders with a range of -5 psig to
250 psig.
The system provides
no control functions.
It receives
vital power from the Reactor Protection
System
Busses
811
and 12.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's
Safety Evaluation dated
April 29,
1981 to determine that the licensee
had properly considered
the effects of this modification on plant safety.
This Safety
Evaluation also indicated that this modification had
been reviewed
by
the Site Operations
Review Committee.
The inspector reviewed guality
Control Inspection Reports
880-425
and 81-154 to determine that
~
~
~
I
I\\.
Hl
trh
"
j
Ht
f I
t,tl
h')
'I
I
~
4
I
I, I
~
fl f
'If
'4
4414 I
'4,
I
r
'I
. It
II
f'
"
~",
Il
'I
~
It
4
tt I'
4
4
4
4
I
~ H
I
I't I
r* It
j
r
I
I'I
'II
'
f,
hl
<<ft
'4
I
I
I
)
h
tf
4
It
~ I
~
I
'I
r
tf
'
I 4
I
II
I'
"rh 'f
I', 4
4>>
I fr
I
444
~
t
II
~
I
~
I,,
I
'I II
rl
f I
HI
I
II
'ft
if
I
'tl
l
th
- I
4
~
4
4
Rh
I
I
4
r
~ f,n
~
Il
1
4
l"
I
Pf
I,
I
Ih
II
tl
tl
F
I"
I
'I
4
13
in-progress quality control inspections
had
been performed
by the
licensee.
Instrument Calibration Reports for the pressure
transmitter
and indicator dated
February
19,
1981
and for the recorder
dated
May 21,
1981
show that the system
was calibrated after installation.
The inspector verified that the licensee
has
added these
instruments
to the periodic calibration schedule.
f
The inspector reviewed the lesson
plan for "Mitigating Core. Damage-Process
Instruments",
and selected training records to ensure that operators
had
been trained in the changes
due to this modification.
This training
also covered modifications required
by Item O'II.F.1.5, "Containment
Water Level Monitor" and Item II.K.3.27,
"Common Reference
Level for
Vessel
Level Instrumentation".
The licensee
appears
to have satisfied this item in accordance
with
his commitments to the
NRC.
Item No. II.F.1.5
Containment
Water Level Monitor
The inspector
examined the wide range torus level instruments
HALI-58-05A and 06A and recorders
8LR 201.2-307
and
308 to determine
if the licensee
had met the commitments of his letter from D. Disc
to D. Eisenhut
(NRC) dated
December
31, 1980.
The system consists of
redundant transmitters,
indicators
and recorders with a range of
15 inches from the bottom of the torus to 3 feet 8 inches
above the
normal water level of the torus.
The system provides
no control
functions.
It receives vital power from the Reactor Protection
System
Busses Ill and 12.
The inspector
reviewed the licensee's
Safety Evaluation dated April 29,
1981 to determine that the licensee
had properly considered
the effects
of this modification on plant safety.
This Safety Evaluation also
indicated that this modification had
been reviewed
by the Site Operations
Review Committee.
The inspector
reviewed guality Control Inspection
Reports
881-526,
563, 507, 587, 598, 638,
641 to determine that in-progress
quality control inspections
had been performed.
Instrument Surveillance
Procedure,
"Torus Water Level Instrumentation,"
Revision 3,
was issued
May 28,
1981 to include the calibration of these
new instruments.
It was performed
on May 30, 1981.
Drawing Transmittal
Letter dated July 10,
1981 forwarded the as-built drawings to the plant.
The licensee
appears
to have satisfied this item in accordance
with his
coranitment to the
NRC.
Item No. II.K.3.27, Co@eon
Reference
Levels for Vessel
Level Instrumentation
On June
1, 1981, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued
Technical Specification
Amendment 845.
This authorized the change to a
common reference
level for all reactor vessel
water level instruments
addressed
in Technical Specifications.
The
common reference
level
was
f
U
U
h"
U I
M ~
h
h
H
'h
I
~
lf
W
I JIJU
ll
hg
Df )
1
H
PPA')'A~h-,') W~ t".i I,'~ fO 3
>Milli.fthm'"
8
'h
I
I
D
~
~
~
1'
f
h
UM
U
~
~
H
h
H
~
U
I,
ttt
"
h
IM
1
11
h
fJ
~ f
1
I
r
U
'J
It
U
U
U
~ f,.
h
Hi"
U
h
r
I ~
I)
f it'HTJ
lt
~
M
~
Ir
I f
I(
M
H
H
I'h h,
~
t',
All'j
Ct
~
H.,
1',
Jli
Mf
I
I
h
U
U
M
H
1
h
a,,
I
.p
~,h=rh
I
h
I
',1l IJ
'1
l
"
h
~ f
~
~
I'f
4
Ih
I
I
I
h 1
~H'J h
.
P
III
U
f
U
~
~
~
tl
D
'
U
f
l
~ H:
H
t
I
I
I
') I
I1*
MhtD
M'II"
I
~
~
U
't
~ I
1
f'
'4
established
as
65 inches
below minimum normal water level, which is
elevation 302'".
The inspector
reviewed the licensee's
Safety Evaluation dated
June 23,
1981 to determine that the licensee
had properly considered
the effects
of the modification on plant safety.
The Safety Evaluation also
indicated that this modification had been reviewed
by the Site Operations
Review Committee
(SORC).
The inspector
observed that all water vessel
level instruments,
except
the reactor
vessel
flange level meter, were modified prior to completion
of the refueling outage
ending July 3, 1981.
The reactor
vessel
level meter is
a special
purpose
instrument for use only during refueling
outages.
The reference point for this meter is the reactor vessel
The inspector
reviewed Instrument Surveillance
Procedures,
Revision 6, dated
June 25,
1981
and
"Reactor Protection
System-Auto Trip System,"
Revision 8,
dated June 25,
1981 to determine that surveillance
procedures
used for
the calibration of reactor vessel
water instruments
had
been revised
after the modification was installed.
The inspector also reviewed
the completed data sheets for the triple low level instruments
836-05A,
B, C,
D to determine that the instruments
had
been calibrated with the
revised procedures
on June 26, 1981.
The inspector
also observed that
the following special
operating
procedures
had
been revised to reflect
changes
in various instrument setpoints
due to the
new water level
reference level:
SOP-30,
"Pipe Break Outside Primary Containment"
SOP-32, "Failure of Reactor to Scram"
The following operating
and special
operating
procedures
required
further revision
as
a result of this modification:
OP-l, "Nuclear Steam Supply System," Revision 14, dated
June 30, 1981.
Revision 1, dated February 2, 1981.
"High Pressure
Cooling Injection," Revision 2, dated
June 5, 1979.
SOP-3,
"Feedwater Malfunction (Decreasing
Flow)," Revision 6,
dated July 1, 1981.
SOP-4,
"Feedwater Malfunction (Increasing
Flow)," Revision 5,
dated July 1, 1981.
SOP-10,
"Safety Valve Opening," Revision 5, dated
March 30, 1980.
SOP-16,
"Reactor Scram," Revision 4, dated
March 30, 1980.
SOP-29,
"Pipe Break Inside Drywell," Revision 3, dated July 1, 1981.
A licensee
management
representative
stated) that these
procedure
changes
would be completed
by December
1, 1981.
This item remains
open pending
NRC review of licensee action
on the above procedures.
4'I P
hh,
"1
)
1
~
1
4
4 ~
4
I 4
4W') hh=-
'
I
II
"'t
WW
tf'
4
Il
4
a
~
tl
a
lf
'
l,
it
"4
wh
'I
) 4
w'4
4 )
~
V
It
II
4
~
4
11
I
r
~
4
il
4
I
~
I
WJP
'I
4
I
I
I
1
4
1
W
i
I
J
4
I
f
"4
I
ht
I )
I
4
,4
~
V
f
'I
1
~
W
4
'4
t II'I
f
ll
~
1I
tl
~
I
4
ll
4','
I ll,,',I'
I
4
ht I
I
1
.
1
4
1 4
'I
li", t
W's
I i
'
hi
4
4,
h
4
ht
'" ll
I
h hhr
4
'If
4
~
tl
~
h
4
ff
'4
I
ll
V
1 ~
I
i a
i'f
P
.4
~
f
4
h
4111
h
a '1
4
'
15
Monthly Operating Report, August 1981.
Monthly Operating Report,
September
1981.
The inspector noticed that the August Monthly Operating Report addressed
the replacement of the sensor
converter unit on 5'll Reactor Building
Ventilation Monitor.
The inspector reviewed
Work Request
f/15020,
guality Control Inspection Report 0'81-1780,
dated July 20, 1981,
and
RTP-23, "Reactor Building Ventilation Monitor Calibration," performed
on July 20, 1981.
He determined that the licensee
had met the
requirements of the Technical Specifications limiting conditions for
operations
during the repair and that the monitor had
been calibrated
after replacement of the sensor converter.
The licensee
should
have
also submitted
a thirty day Licensee
Event Report since the repair is
considered
corrective maintenance
on
a safety related
system.
The
licensee
stated that
a Licensee
Event Report would be submitted.
(50-220/81-27-04)
14.
Unresolved
Items
Unresolved
items are matters
about which more information is required
to clarify whether they are acdeptable,
items of noncompliance
or
deviations.
One unresolved
item was described in paragraph
9.
15.
Exit Interview
13.
Review of Periodic
Re orts
The following reports
were reviewed to verify that reporting requirements
of the Technical Specifications
are being met and that plant operations
are being accurately reported:
At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection,
meetings
were held with senior facility management
to discuss
the inspection
scope
and findings.
1
Atgg rt rl'I I)
'
~ rr
I)
ll ~
p+ntt
'f
1(tf
)
I
ll
~
I rt,rit
I
II,
II
tl
~
4
I
~
1
4
~ Il