ML18102A325

LER 96-016-00:on 960719,missed Surveillance for RHR Pump Dynamic Head Prior to Entering Mode 4.Caused by Inadequate Procedural Control for Verification of Change Requirements. W/960818 Ltr

ML18102A325
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	08/18/1996
From:	Garchow D, Hassler D Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
LER-96-016-01, LER-96-16-1, LR-N96246, NUDOCS 9608260103
Download: ML18102A325 (5)

Text

OPS~G

• Public*Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038-0236 Nuclear Business Unit AUG 18 1996 LR-N96246 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:

LER 272/96-016-00 SALEM GENERATING STATION - UNIT 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-70 DOCKET NO. 50-272 This Licensee Event Report entitled "Missed Surveillance for RHR Pump Dynamic Head Prior To Entering Mode 4" is being submitted pursuant to the requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations 10CFR50. 73 (a) (2) (i) (B) .

([QlF~~

David F. Garchow General Manager -

Salem Operations Attachment SORC Mtg.96-109 JMO/tcp C Distribution LER File 3.7 9608260103 960818 PDR ADOCK 05000272 _/_-£* , ., ,. 7 1/

- - /.a<. I S PDR Th: pc!\\ er is in \DUr hands.

95-2168 REV. 6/94

Document Control Desk LR-N96246 Attachment A The following represents the commitments that Public Service Electric

& Gas (PSE&G) made to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) relative to this LER (272/96-016-00). The commitments are as follows:

1. A review will be conducted to evaluate the generic implications of this event for past reportability. This review will be completed prior to restart of Unit 2.

2. Mode transition procedural controls will be evaluated and improved as necessary to ensure that the higher Mode acceptance criteria are used to verify the acceptability of making a Mode transition. The review will be completed prior to Mode 4. Any necessary procedure changes will be completed prior to the respective Mode transition.

3. A Technical Specification Surveillance Improvement Project (TSSIP) has been initiated for Salem Units 1 and 2. The scope and content of the TSSIP program was described previously in LER 311/95-008-00.

The TSSIP review is expected to be completed December 31, 1997.

NRC FORM 366 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION APPROVED BY OMB NO. 3150-0104 (4*95) EXPIRES 04/30/98 ESTIMATED BURDEN PER RESPONSE TD CDMPLY WITH THIS MANDATORY INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST: 50.0 HRS. REPORTED LESSONS LEARNED ARE INCORPORATED INTD THE LICENSING PROCESS AND FED BACK TO INDUSTRY. FORWARD COMMENTS REGARDING LICENSEE EVENT REPORT {LER) BURDEN ESTIMATE TD THE INFORMATION AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT BRANCH lT*6 F33J, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, WASHINGTDN, DC 20555-0001, AND TO THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION PROJECT (3150*0104), OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, (See reverse for required number of WASHINGTDN. DC 20503.

digits/characters for each block)

FACILITY IAME (11 DOCKET IUMBER (2) PAGE 131 SALEM GENERATING STATION UNIT 1 05000272 1 OF 3 TITLE (41 Missed Surveillance for RHR Pump Dynamic Head Prior To Entering Mode 4 EVENT DA TE (5) LER NUMBER (6) REPORT DATE (7) OTHER FACILITIES INVOLVED (8)

MONTH DAY YEAR YEAR I SEQUENTIAL NUMBER I REVISION NUMBER MOITH DAY YEAR FACILITY NAME Salem, Unit 2 DOCKET NUMBER 05000311 FACILITY NAME DOCKET IUMBER 07 19 96 96 016 00 08 18 96 OPERATING N THIS REPORT IS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR §: (Check one or more) (11)

MODE(9) 20.2201(b) 20.2203(a)(2)(v) X 50.73(a)(2)fl) 50.73(a)(2)(viii)

POWER 000 20.2203(a)(1) 20.2203(a)(3)(i) 50.73(a)(2)(ii) 50.73(a)(2)(x)

LEVEL (10) 20.2203(a)(2)(i) 20.2203(a)(3)(ii) 50.73(a)(2)(iii) 73.71 114 1

-:11----1-~--:....,:~"'~"'::,..,.::.,..::..,..~:--::~--::-----+----t-:-::-~:-~-::-!:----------t--+-:-~:--~~--::....,::=~:,.,.::..,..::-1 --------t;-.,~,....~~~c~*~~;;~X8ct below or in LICENSEE CONTACT FOR THIS LER (12)

NAME TELEPHOIE NUMBER (lnclud1 Ar11 Codi)

Dennis V. Hassler, LER Coordinator 609-339-1989 COMPLETE ONE LINE FOR EACH COMPONENT FAILURE DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT (131 lf---CA-U-SE--+--S-YS-T-EM--+--C-DM-P-Dl-EIT---t--MA-1-U-FA-CT-UR_E_ft-+-R-i~_O.-R:_:~-~E---f:lof---CA-US-E--+--SY-ST_E_M-+--C-OMP-0-IE-IT-+--MA-IU-FA-C-TU-RE-R-t---R-i~-DN-R:_:~-~E--ll SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT EXPECTED (14) EXPECTED MONTH DAY YEAR YES SUBMISSION (If yes, complete EXPECTED SUBMISSION DATEJ. DATE (151 ABSTRACT (Limit to 1400 spaces, i.e., approximately 15 single-spaced typewritten lines) (16)

On July 19, 1996, while reviewing RHR pump testing acceptance criteria, a procedure writer noted that the surveillance procedure wording did not ensure that total dynamic head requirements were met when transitioning from Mode 5 to Mode 4. A root cause investigation confirmed that Units 1 and 2 had transitioned from Mode 5 to Mode 4 without verifying that the pump total dynamic head requirement of Technical Specification 4.5.2.f.3 had been met, as required by Technical Specification 4.0.4. Since 1990, Salem Units 1 and 2 have made numerous Mode changes from Mode 5 to Mode 4.

The cause of this occurrence was determined to be inadequate procedural controls for verification of Mode change requirements.

This event is reportable in accordance with 10 CFR 50.73(a) (2) (i) (B), any condition prohibited by the plant's Technical Specifications.

NRC FORM 366 (4*95)

NRC FORM J&&A (4*95)

• LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)

TEXT CONTINUATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FACILITY NAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER NUMBER (6) PAGE (JJ 05000272 YEAR I SEOUEITIAL IUMBEI l REVISIOI llUllllEll 2 OF 3 SALEM GENERATING STATION UNIT 1 96 - 016 - 00 TEXT Pf more space is required, use additional copies of NRC Form J&&AJ (17 J PLANT AND SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Westinghouse - Pressurized Water Reactor Residual Heat Removal Pump {BP/P}*

• Energy Industry Identification System (EIIS) codes and component function identifier codes appear as {SS/CCC}

CONDITIONS PRIOR TO OCCURRENCE At the time of identification, Salem Units 1 and 2 were shutdown and defueled.

DESCRIPTION OF OCCURRENCE On July 19, 1996, while reviewing RHR pump testing acceptance criteria, a procedure writer noted that the surveillance procedure wording did not ensure that total dynamic head requirements were met when transitionin~ from Mode 5 to Mode 4. A root cause investigation confirmed that Units 1 and 2 had transitioned from Mode 5 to Mode 4 without verifying that the pump total dynamic head requirement of Technical Specification 4.5.2.f.3 had been met, as required by Technical Specification 4.0.4. Since 1990, Salem Units 1 and 2 have made numerous Mode changes from Mode 5 to Mode 4.

The Residual Heat Removal pump in-service surveillance test procedures were written to capture test data for Modes 1 through 4 or Modes 5 and 6. In Modes 5 and 6, full flow test data was collected, but total dynamic head was not evaluated against the Technical Specification requirement since the requirement was not applicable in Modes 5 and 6. The integrated operating procedure (IOP) for transition from Mode 5 to Mode 4 required satisfactory completion of the RHR surveillance test, but did not specify the use of Mode 4 acceptance criteria.

Consequently, the completion of the test using Mode 5 and 6 criteria inappropriately satisfied the IOP requirements. In keeping with the 92 day test interval, subsequent RHR pump surveillances were run that demonstrated acceptability of total dynamic head.

CAUSE OF OCCURRENCE The cause of this occurrence was determined tc be inadequate procedural controls for verification of Mode change requirements.

NRC FORM 366A (4-95)

NRC f,ORM 366A (4*95)

• LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LEH)

TEXT CONTINUATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FACILITY NAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (21 LER NUMBER 161 PAGE (3) 05000272 YEAR I SEQUENTIAL NUMBER I REVISION NUl\tlER 3 OF 3 SALEM GENERATING STATION UNIT 1 96 - 016 - 00 TEXT (If more space is required, use additional copies of NRC form 366AI (17)

PRIOR SIMILAR OCCURRENCES A review of LERs for Salem Units 1 and 2 over the last two years identified six LERs (272/94-008, 272/95-004, 272/95-019, 272/95-028, 311/95-006, and 311/95-008) that were a result of missed surveillances due to inadequate implementation of Technical Specification requirements. The corrective actions were specific to the missed surveillance issues addressed in each LER. The identification of these programmatic issues resulted in the initiation of the Technical Specification Surveillance Improvement Program (TSSIP) described in LER 311/95-008.

SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE & IMPLICATIONS The testing that was performed in Mode~ 5 and 6, prior to transition to Mode 4, was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Inservice Testing Program, at full flow conditions, and provided reasonable assurance that the RHR pumps were operable. The RHR pumps were subsequently tested on a quarterly basis as required by the Mode 1 through 4 requirements. A selected search of historical records did not identify any instances where a pump tested in Modes 5 or 6 subsequently failed a test in Modes 1 through 4. Thus, there was no safety significance to the missed surveillance and the health and safety of the public remained unaffected.

CORRECTIVE ACTION

1. A review will be conducted to ev:'.luate the generic implications of this event for past reportability. This review will be completed prior to restart of Unit 2.

2. Mode transition procedural controls will be evaluated and improved as necessary to ensure that the higher Mode acceptance criteria are used to verify the acceptability of making a Mode transition. The review will be completed prior to Mode 6. Any necessary procedure changes will be completed prior to the respective Mode transition.

3. A Technical Specification Surveillance Improvement Project (TSSIP) has been initiated for Salem Units 1 and 2. The scope and content of the TSSIP program was described previously in LER 311/95-008-00. The TSSIP review is expected to be completed December 31, 1997.

NRC FORM 366A (4-95)