ML17250B011
| ML17250B011 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1989 |
| From: | Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17250B012 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-89-13, NUDOCS 8910190070 | |
| Download: ML17250B011 (16) | |
See also: IR 05000244/1989013
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report
No.
50-244/89"13
Licensee
No.
DPR-18-
Licensee:
Rochester
Gas
and Electric Corporation
49 East
Avenue
Rochest'er,
Facility:
Location:
R.
E. Ginna Nuclear. Power Plant
Ontario,
Inspection
Conducted:
August
7 through September
10,
1989
Inspectors:
.Approved by:
N.'erry, Acting Senior Resident
Inspector,
Ginna
E. Yachimiak, Acting Resident
Inspector,
Ginna
8 c'4
E.
C.
McCabe, Chief, Reactor Projects
Section
38
I o/z/zy
Date
~Summar:
Areas Ins ected:
Routine inspection
by the resident
inspectors
of station ac-
tivities including plant operations,
radiological controls,
maintenance,
sur-
veillancee,
security, periodic
and special
reports,
and the recent
SALP manage-
ment meeting.
Inspection activities consisted of 93 hours0.00108 days <br />0.0258 hours <br />1.537698e-4 weeks <br />3.53865e-5 months <br /> of inspection,
and
included five hours of backshift inspection.
Results:
The plant operated
safely during this inspection period,
and the
licensee effectively dealt with plant occurrences.
'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1.
Persons Contacted................
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
1
2.
Summary of Plant Operations...........................'...............
1
3.
Areas Inspected.
~
~
~
~
3
a.
Plant Operations...
b.
Radi ol ogi ca 1 'ontrol s
c.
Maintenance..-
d.
Surveillance.
e.
Security.....
f.
Periodic
and Special
Reports
g.
Reports- of Nonroutine Events.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
3
3
3
4
5
5
5
4.
'ALP Management
Meeting.
5.
Exit Inter vice.
~
~ at ~
~
~
~
~
6
6
DETAILS
Persons
Contacted
During this inspection period,
inspectors
held discussions
with and inter-
viewed operators,
technicians,
engineers
and supervisory level personnel.
The following people
were
among those contacted:
S
D
A
R.
T.
R;
A.
~).
I
~
~
- S
J.
Adams,
Technical
Manager
Fi lkins, Manager of HP
8 Chemistry
Jones,
Corrective Action Coordinator
Narchionda,
Director of Outage
Planning
Marlow, Superintendent,
Support Services
Mecredy,
General
Manager,
Nuclear Production
Morris, Maintenance
Manager
St. Martin, Corrective Action Coordinator
Schuler,
Operations
Manager
Smith, Operations
Supervisor
Spector,
Superintendent,
Ginna Station
Widay, Superintendent,
Ginna Production
"Denotes
persons
present
at exit meeting
on September
14,
1989.
Summar
of Plant
0 erations
At the beginning of the inspection period,
the plant was in hot shutdown
with Microprocessor
Rod Position Indication (MRPI) System troubleshooting
activities ongoing.
On August 7,
1989, control rod position indication
coil stack
F-12 was determined to be shorted to ground; this caused
the
MRPI problems.
The plant was taken to cold shutdown
and the
F-12 coil
stack
was replaced with a qualified spare.
The reactor
was taken critical
on August ll, 1989.
With reactor
power at approximately
13 percent
on August 11,
1989, opera-
tors attempted
to manually withdraw control rods during the load increase.
Bank "D" was expected
to- move, but Bank "A" received
a withdraw demand
signal
instead.
No rods
moved,
as
Bank "A" was already fully withdrawn.
The rod control
bank overlap unit was found to be reset,
which caused
the
demand for Bank "A" to withdraw.
The bank overlap unit was set to the
correct position
and the load increase
was
resumed.
At the close of the
inspection period, the licensee
had not determined
the cause of the bank
overlap unit reset.
The annual
emergency
exercise
.was held
on August 16,
1989
and is addressed
in
NRC Inspection
Report 50-244/89-20.
On August 24,
1989 the "A" safety injection
pump recirculation'heck
valve
failed to check flow during monthly surveillance.
The valve was then re-
tested satisfactorily twice, once after running the "A" safety injection
pump to provide forward flow through the check valve.
No cause for the
malfunction was found.
The licensee
increased
the surveillance
frequency.
No additional malfuncti'on occurred,
and the prescribed
surveillance fre-
quency
was restored.
On August 28,
1989, during Periodic Test PT-1,
Rod Control System,
two
control
bank groups failed to move upon demand.
Operators initiated
a
plant shutdown in accordance
with technical
specifications,
and Instrumen-
tation
and Controls personnel
were called in.
Based
on discussion
with
representatives
during troubleshooting,
two circuit cards in
the rod control
system were replaced.
The rod control
system
was retested
satisfactorily,
the power reduction
was halted at approximately
65 per-
cent,
and the plant was returned to full power.'he
two circuit cards
were sent to Westinghouse
for further testing.
At the close of the in-
spection period, that testing
was not completed.
During normal primary system chemistry
sampling
on September
1,
1989,
an
increase
in iodine indicated failed fuel cladding.
Control
room operators
noted
a small but steady
increase
in primary system radiation levels,
con-
firming the chemistry
sample results;
Iodine concentration
peaked
on Sep-
tember
3 and reached equilibrium during the following week.
The iodine
level
and total
system activity were below technical
specification
limits't
all times.
The licensee
implemented thei r action plan for failed fuel
and,
based
on communications
wi.th Westinghouse,
estimated that one or two
fuel rods caused
the activity increase.
On September
3,
1989,
the licensee
received
information from the Rochester
Police Department
concerning
a
bomb threat against
Ginna Nuclear
Power
Station.
The threat
was received
on the
911
number.
Rochester
police
stated that the caller was identified and picked up.
The
same
individual'as
reportedly threatened
Ginna and. government officials in the past.
The
threat
was assessed
as not credible.
During
a= periodic test of operability of heat trace circuits on September
7,
1989, electrici'ans
discovered
a blown fuse in the secondary
circuit for the discharge
piping of the "B" boric acid
pump.
The heat
tracing
and fuse were replaced
and the
system
was returned to
an operable
status.
The primary heat trace circuitry remained
operable at all times.
On September
8,
1989, during
a periodic component cooling water
system
test,
the licensee
found the
low pressure
alarm setpoint
and the standby
pump auto-start
setpoint out of calibration.
The licensee
suspected
that
the primary cause
was setpoint drift caused
by pump stopping
and starting.
The setpoints
were recalibrated
and the test
was satisfactorily completed
(see section 3.d.).
The licensee
is evaluating corrective actions.
At the close of the inspection period,
the plant was operating at approxi-
mately full power.
e
'
3.
Functional or Pro
ram Areas Ins ected
a.
Plant
0 erations
(71707)
The inspectors
assessed
whether the Ginna Nuclear
Power Plant oper-
ated safely and in conformance with regulatory requirements.
Por-
tions of Rochester
Gas
and Electric Corporation's
management
control
systems
were evaluated
to ensure effective discharging of its re-
sponsibilitiess
for continued
safe operation.
Licensee actions during the inspection
period were found to be con-
servative.
For example,
the start-up
on August 11,
1989 was stopped
while rod control troubleshooting activities were performed;
the "A"
safety injection
pump, check valve was retested
twice on August 24,
1989;
and after the August 28,
1989 control rod failure, several
re-
tests
were performed.
No unsafe plant conditions were identified.
Radiolo ical Controls (71707)
C.
The resident"inspectors
periodically verified that
RWPs were imple-
mented properly, dosimetry was correctly worn in contr~lied areas
and
dosimeter
readings
were accurately
recorded,
access
control at en-
trances
was adequate,
personnel
used
con-
tamination monitors
as required
when exiting controlled areas,
and
postings
and labeling were in compliance with regulations
and proce-
dures.
No inadequacies
were i'dentified.
Maintenance
(62703)'
The inspectors
observed
safety-related
maintenance
to verify that
redundant
components
were operable; activities did not violate limit-
ing conditions for operation;
required administrative
approvals
and
tagouts
were obtained prior to initi'ating work; approved
procedures
were
used or the activity was within the "skills of the trade," ap-
propriate radiological controls were implemented; ignition/fire pre-.
vention controls were properly implemented;
and equipment
was pro-
. perly tested prior to its return to service.
Portions of the follow-
ing activity were observed:
Calibration Procedure
CP-210B, "Calibration and/or
Maintenance
of
RMS Channel
R-10B (Plant Vent Iodine)," Revision
1, effective
date January ll, 1989,
observed
September
6-7,
1989.
During
this activity,'he technicians
found
a minor procedure
problem.
The technicians
stopped
the activity and
had the procedure
cor-
rected before resuming.
The inspectors
concluded that this
.
maintenance activity was performed
correctly.'n
August 15,
1989,
"A" main steam line radiation monitor, R-31,
~ failed.. Technical
specifications
allow R-31 to be inoperable for
seven
days.
That limit was not exceeded,
as the monitor was returned
to service
on August 22.
However, the work was initiated late due to
improper prioritization and technicians
were unaware of the
seven
day
limit.
Plant maintenance
management
stated that, in the future,
maintenance
personnel will be cognizant of technical specification
limits.
The inspectors
had
no further questions.
Overall, maintenance
was assessed
as satisfactory.
d.
Survei l 1 ance
(61726)
The inspectors
observed
surveillances
to verify that the testing
demonstrated
operability, test instrumentation
was properly cali-
brated,
approved
procedures
were used,
work was performed
by quali-
fied personnel,
limiting conditions for operation
were met,
and sys-
, tems were correctly restored
following testing.
Portions of the fol-
lowing surveillances
were observed:
Periodi" Test PT-1, Revision 26,
"Rod Control System," effective
date
May 13,
1989,
observed
August 29,
1989.
PT-2.8,
Revision 21,
"Component Cooling Water
Pump System," ef-
fective date July 14,
1989,
observed
September
8,
1989.
During performance
of PT-2.8, miscommunication
between
two test per-
sonnel
resulted
in the opening of the "A" residual
heat
removal
heat
exchanger
Component Cooling Water
(CCW) outlet valve further than
required to achieve
the desired test flow for the "A" CCW pump.
This
resulted
in auto-start of the "B" (standby)
CCW pump
on low system
pressure.
The valve was repositioned to its correct setting
and the
"B" pump was
stopped
by a control
room operator.
The test
was then
completed with satisfactory results.
Subsequent
review revealed that
both the low pressure
alarm setpoint
and the standby
pump auto-start
setpoint
were out of calibration.
Instrumentation
and Control tech-
nicians recalibrated
both setpoints.
A station event report was ori-
ginated to notify the
NRC resident
inspector
and appropriate
Ginna
station personnel.
Although miscommunication
caused
the unanticipated start of the
standby
pump,
the inspectors
observed that subsequent
test personnel
actions demonstrated
clear understanding
of the system's
design
and
operation.
Their inquiries into the cause of the incident resulted
in correction of a deficient condition which could have otherwise
gone undetected.
Overall, surveillance activities were assessed
as satisfactory.
e.
~Securit
(71707)
During this inspection period, the resident
inspectors verified that
x-ray machines
and metal
and explosive detectors
were operational,
Protected
Area and Vital Area barriers
were maintained,
access
con-
trol during security tur'nover was adequate,
personnel
were properly
badged,
and compensatory
measures
were implemented
when necessary.
No inadequacies
were
identified'.
Periodic
and
S ecial
Re orts (90713)
Upon receipt, periodic
and special
licensee
reports
submitted pur-
'uant to Technical Specifications 6.9. 1 and 6.9.3 were reviewed.
This review included the following considerations:
reports contained
information required
by the
NRC; test results and/or supporting in-
formation were consistent with design predictions
and performance
specifications;
and reported
information was valid.
The following
report was reviewed:
Monthly Operating
Report for July,
1989.
No inadequacies
were identified.
g.
Written
Re orts of Nonroutine Events
(90712)
Written reports
submitted to the
NRC were reviewed to determine
whether details
were clearly reported,
causes
were properly identi-
fied,
and corrective actions
were appropriate.
The inspectors
also
determined
whether potential
safety consequences
had
been properly
evaluated,
generic implications were indicated,
the events warranted
onsite follow-up, and the reporting requi rements of 10 CFR 50.72
and
10 CFR 73 had
been
met.
The following LERs were reviewed (date in-
dicated is event date):
89-008, July 6,
1989,
"Dropped Control
Rod During Rod Control
System Exercises
Causes
Automatic Turbine Runback."89-009, July 29,
1989, "Failure of Control
Rod Position Indica-
tion System
Due to
a Grounded Coil Stack Causes
Plant Shutdown
per Technical Specifications."89-010, July 30,
1989,
"Safeguards
Bus Undervoltage
Relay Actu-
ation
Due to a Loose
Fuse
Connection
Causes
Automatic Start of
the "B" Emergency, Diesel G'enerator."
No inadequacies
were identified.
SALP Mana ement Meetin
On August 24,
1989, the Systematic
Assessment
of Licensee
Performance
(SALP) Report 50-244/87,-99
was discussed
at
a management
meeting in the
RG&E corporate offices in Rochester.
NRC management
summarized
licensee
strengths
and weaknesses
as described
in .the
SALP report.
RGEE indicated
general
agreement
with the report and stated that
a written response
would
be drafted within a month.
In addition,
RGhE committed to meet with NRC
management
to describe
programs
developed
to strengthen
performance.
Exit Interview (30703)
I
The inspectors
met with senior plant management
periodically and at the
end of the inspection period to discuss
inspection
scope
and
findings.'ased
on
NRC Region I review of this report
and discussion .held with lic-
ensee
representatives,
it was concluded that this report does
not contain
information subject to
10 CFR 2.790 restriction's.