ML18227A568
| ML18227A568 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/17/1976 |
| From: | Robert E. Uhrig Florida Power & Light Co |
| To: | Long F NRC/IE, NRC/RGN-II |
| References | |
| L-76-192 IR 1976004 | |
| Download: ML18227A568 (12) | |
Text
~
gg
= 'a t.
FLORIDA POWER 5 UGHT QOiV'aPAAY L-76-192 May 17, 1976
/z gyes gd g4'/
Mr. F. J.
Long, Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Region,XI Office of Xnspection and Enforcement U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 230 Peachtree
- Street, N. W., Suite 818 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. Long:
Re:
XE:XI:AKH 50-250/76-4 50-251/76-4 Florida Power G Light Company has reviewed the subject inspection report.
No proprietary information has been identified in the report.
Very truly yours, Vice President REU/GDW/hlc cc:
Jack R.
- Newman, Esq.
D'OR<<0' O
OO o~
+lI*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II 330 PEACHTREE STREET', N. W. SUITE SIS ATLANTA'EORGIA 30303 APR L6 876 In Reply Refer To:
IE:II:AKH 0-250
-251/76-4 Florida Power and Light Company Attn:
Dr. R.
E. Uhrig, Vice President of Nuclear Affairs P. 0. Box 013100 9250.West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33101 Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. A. K. Haxdin of this office on March 30 to April 2, 1976, of activities authorized by. NRC Operating License Nos.
DPR-31 and DPR-41 for the Turkey Point 3 and 4
facilities, and to the discussion of our findings held with Mr. Yaeger at the conclusion-.of the inspection.
Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed inspection report.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examination of procedures and represent:ative records, inter-
'views with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were disclosed.
We have also examined actions you have taken with regard to previously identified unresolved items and deviation.
The status of these items is identified in Sections IV and VI of the. summary of the enclosed report.
\\
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice,"
Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed. inspection report willbe placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information that you believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you submit a. written application to this office requesting that such information be wit:hheld from public disclosure.
If no proprietary. information is identified, a written statement to that effect should be subm"tted. If an application is
~ \\
APR 16 ~8 Plorida Power and Light Co.
submitted, it must fully identify the bases for which information is clawed to be proprietary.
The application should be prepared so that information sought to be withheld is incorporated in a separate paper and referenced in the application since the application will,be placed in the Public Document Room.
Your application, or written statement, should be submitted to us within 20 days. If we are not contacted as specified, the enclosed report and this letter may then be placed in the Public Document Room.
Should you have any quests.ons concerning this letter,.we willbe glad to discuss them with you.
Very truly yours, P. J. Long, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch t
Enclosure:
IE Inspection'eport Nos.
50-250/76-4 and 50-25l/76-4
ee+
vp eI O
0 E'e ee
/~'3 ++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II 230 PEACHTREE STREETr N W SUITE 8I8 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 IE Inspection Report Nos.
50-250 6-4 and 50-251/76-4 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street P. 0. Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name:
Turkey Point 3 and 4
Docket Nos.:
50-250 and 50-251 License Nos.:
C/C Location:
Dade County, Florida Type of License:
W PWR-760 Mwe, 2200 Hut t
Type of Inspection:
- Routine, Unannounced Dates of Inspection.'March 30 - April 2, 1976 Dates of Previous Inspection:
February 18-20, 1976 Principal Inspector:
A. K. Hardin, Reactor Inspector Reactor Projects Section 2
Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Accompanying Inspector:
None Other Accompanying Personne1:
None
~
(
Principal Inspector:
A. K.'ar in, Reactor Inspector Reactor Projects Section 2
Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Reviewed by: Z
+'.
C. Lewis, Chief Reactor Projects Section - 2 Reactors'Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
~/r~
Date
/s 7C, Date
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-250/76-4 and 50-251/76-4
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS I.
Enforcement Action None II.
Licensee Action on Previousl Identified Enforcement Matters Followup of previously identified enforcement matters was not accomplished on this inspection.
III.
New Unresolved Items None IV.
Status of Previousl Re orted Unresolved Items The following unresolved items are current but were not.reviewed during the inspection and remain open.
76-3/1 Plant Nuclear Safety Committee Reviews 75-17/1 - Liquid Effluent Control Monitor 75-17/2 - Containment Air System Equipment 75-17/3 - Containment Air System Procedure 75-17/6 Non-Shift Licensee on Watch Duty 75-10/3 Valve Replacement V.
Unusual Occurrences None VI.
Other Si nificant Findin s A.
Plant Status r
Both Turkey Point (TP) 3 and 4 were operating at 100X power.
Preparation for shutdown of Unit 4 on April 19 for refueling was in progress.
B.
S ent Fuel Pit Liner Leak The licensee has recently initiated added emphasis to investi-gating-potential methods of repairing the liner leaks in both TP 3 and 4 spent fuel pit basin.
(Details I, paragraph 3)
C.
IE Rpt. No. 50-250/76-1 identified a deviation involving failure to update safety related plant drawings.
The licensee's responses dated March 8 and March 29, 1976, described the program they intend to follow until drawings are updated.
Item remains open.
(Details I, paragraph 2)
~
XE Rpt. Hos. 50-250/76-4 and 50-251/76-4 VII.
Mana ement Interview The results of the inspection were discussed with the FP&L Management personnel listed in Details I, paragraph 1.
The following items were discussed.
A.
Pindings relative to inspection of Plant Operations.
(Details I, paragraph 5)
B.
Findings relative to inspection of Licensee Event Reports;-.
(Details I, paragraph 4)
C.
Status of licensees'tudies on spent fuel pit liner leak.
(Details I, paragraph 3)
D.
Status of. plant drawing update.
(Details I, paragraph 2)
DETAILS I Prepared by:
A. K. Hardin, Reactor Inspector Reactor Projects Section No.
2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Date Dates of Inspection:
March 30, <o April 2, 1976
~'
Reviewed by:
R.
C. Lewis, Chief Reactor Projects Section No.
2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Date All information in the details applies equally to Turkey Point (TP) 3 and 4, except where information is identified with a. specific reactor.
l.
Individuals Contacted*
H. E. Yaeger Plant Manager J.
K. Hays Plant Superintendent, Nuclear J.
E. Moore Superintendent, Nuclear Operations V. B. Wager - Operations Supervisor, Nuclear J.
A. Olsonoski QC Compliance Engineer D. W. Jones QC Supervisor R. B. Wallace QA Engineer A. E. Siebe Assistant Manager of QA Operations L. L. Leskovjan Nuclear Licensing Engineer N. F. Agluni Nuclear Staff Coordinator C. D. Ward Plant Supervisor, Electrical C.
C. Yates Operations Superintendent (Fossil)
D. D. Brady Nuclear Plant Supervisor J. P. Mendieta I&C Supervisor G.
G. Jones Nuclear Plant Supervisor
- Listed personnel were present at exit interview.
2.
Plant Drawin U date IE Report No. 50-250/76-1 identified a deviation involving failure to update plant drawings, following modifications.
The licensee response to the deviation on March 8 and 29, stated that four technicians would be assigned full-time by May 1, 1976, to review and revise the'lant drawings.
Also, that the technicians would not be assigned any other duties until the drawing update program has been completed.
The safety related systems are to be given first attention.
In addition, periodic updates would be provided describing the progress of the program.
IR Rpt. No. 50-250/76-6 I-.2 The licensee informed the inspector at the site on 3/31/76 that the four technicians were already assigned to the work.
This had been accomplished by hiring one technician and reassigning three others from the plant staff. Activities to bring plant drawings up-to-date are proceeding as described in the licensee's commitment; however, pending completion of the program, the item will remain open.
3.
S ent Fuel Pit Leaks In Unusual Event Report Nos. UE-250-74-6 and UE-251-75-3 and IE Report Nos.
50-250 and 251/74-10, 74-12 and 75-1, leaks through the liners on the Spent Fuel Pits
{SFP) were reported and discussed.
On the current inspection, the SFP leak and repair status were reviewed.'art of FPL's investigation of the SFP leakage involved draining of the SFP transfer canal and key way,and varying the SFP water level to observe the leakage as a function of water level.
A review of the leakage data on Unit 3 revealed that when the level was reduced from 12.5" {as measured from the top of the SFP) to 13", the measured'eakage decreased from about 0.45 gpm to 0.23 gpm.
Of this leakage the licensee reports that about 0.02 gpm is leaking through the liner and out the leak chase system and the remainder is leaking past the key way gate and into the drained transfer canal;
- thence, to the waste hold up tank for processing.
The data shows that as the SFP water level was decreased in Unit 4 SFP, that the leakage rate did not always decrease, but in some instances an increased leakage was noted.
Management stated that the increased leakage with a decrease in SFP level was believed to be as a result of a decrease in the sealing pressure
{caused by, decrease in water head) on the key way gate; resulting in increased leakage past the seal of the gate.
The water leaking past the gate flowed into the drained transfer canal and thence to the waste hold up tank for processing.
Management stated that a visual inspection of the leakage rate past the gate corroborates this conclusion.
Manage-
... ment stated that, in addition, a daily boron analysis of the waste holdup tank and water inventory balance correlates closely with the reduced SFP levels.
The licensee reported that no leakage is coming from the leak trace system of Unit 4.
A visual inspection of the areas adjacent to both Units 3 and 4
spent fuel pits, with particular attention to the areas where previous leakage was noted, indicated that spent fuel pit water is not leaking to the outside of the buildings.
The licensee further stated they are investigating potential repair methods.
Of the methods being reviewed, most require transferring spent fuel from one SFP to the sister reactor SFP and draining the
IE Rpt. No. 50-250/76-4 pool.
This task was estimated as requiring as much as six months or more to transfer spent fuel and process the SFP water before liner repair or replacement could be started.
The licensee informed Region II by telecon on April 14, 1976, that repair of the weld defects in the stainless steel liner of Unit 4 SFP transfer canal were commenced on April 13, 1976.
Following completion of the weld
- repair, the key way and transfer canal will be refilled with water and leak tested.
The licensee has submitted a request to Nuclear Reactor Regulation for increasing the fuel storage capacity of the SFPs.
Tentative plans are to coincide the SFP leak repair with the installation of new high capacity spent fuel racks in the basin, if additional storage capacity is approved.
This item remains open.
4.
Licensee Event Re orts'he inspector reviewed four events which the licensee reported during the first quarter 1976.'e ortable Occurrence 250-76-1 On February 19, 1976, during normal steady state operation of Unit 3, water was found leaking from'the casing of the 3A charging pump.
The licensee made a weld repair on the pump and operated the pump to test for leakage.
No leakage was observed and the pump has been returned to service.
The licensee stated a new casing has been ordered and when received the pump will be rebuilt.
No further direct inspection of this event is anticipated, as operability of the pump has been demonstrated.
b.
Re ortable Occurrence 250-76-2 On March 6, 1976, during normal steady state power operation, the licensee observed that power to the 3B emergency diesel generator breaker closing spring charging motor was not available.
Inspection indicated that a worn bushing had rendered the motor inoperable.
The inspector reviewed the occurrence at the site and examined the faulty parts.
The charging spzing pawl has a plastic bushing, which the licensee believes allowed sufficient wear to cause the event.
The licensee has replaced the circuit breaker with an identical breaker and tested the-breaker./'he licensee stated that further corrective action will in-clude reviewing the feasibility of replacing'the plastic bushing charging spring drive pawl with a pawl containing a
bronze bushing.
This item remains open pending final correc-tive action.
XE Rpt. Ro. 50-250/76-4 l-4 C ~
Re ortable Occurrence 251-76-1 On January 30, 1976, the licensee found during a periodic test, that one channel of overtemperature AT setpoint was about one degree higher than the Technical Specification limit.
The licensee determined that failure of two 500 MFD filter capacitors permitted the setpoint to be raised above the required value.
The licensee's review of this occurrence concluded the failure of the capacitors was not generic.
d.
Re or'table Occurrence 251-76-2 On February 14, 1976, the licensee determined, during a periodic test, that the Refueling Water Storage Tank
{RWST) contained about one percent less water than specified in Technical Specifications.
The licensee proposes to install a narrow range gauge as a backup to the wide range gauge and to install test gauges on each RWST as a backup to control room gauges.
The licensees design review had not been completed at the.time of the inspection.
This item remains open pending, completion of corrective action.
5.
Plant 0 erations a ~
~Lo Books Control room log books for Units 3 and 4 were reviewed for the period March 19 thru March 30, '1976.
At the exit interview, the inspector discussed with the licensee the lack of detail in log books.
The inspector described an example of inadequate detail in which the log entries showed the condensate storage
'ank to be less than minimum level five times during the 10 day period and no reason was given in the console log.
The licensee stated problems were being experienced at the water treatment plant.
The Technical Specification for the con-densate storage tank allows 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to return a tank to the correct level should the tank be found below minimum level.
The inspector verified that log entries showed that Technical Specifications were met within the required time period.
The licensee agreed log entries could be improved.
b.
Reactor Tri s
/
A review'f the reactor trip logs showed Unit 4 had made five shutdowns since 1/1/76.
Three of the shutdowns were reactor trips.
The three trips were due to Steam Generator
{SG) low
- level, SG high level 'and a generator lock out due to loss of field.
IR Rpt. No. 50-250/76-4 I-5 On Unit 3 there were five shutdowns, one of which was a reactor trip due to a loss of SG level control.
C ~
Control Room Instrumentation A review and discussion of control room annunciators in the alarm condition was conducted with contxol room operatoxs.
A review of valve and switch positions on selected equipment was made and discussed with operators.
No areas of noncompliance with regulations were observed.