ML19207B190
| ML19207B190 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1979 |
| From: | Ebneter S, Gage L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19207B188 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-78-25, 50-289-79-25, 50-320-78-38, NUDOCS 7908230524 | |
| Download: ML19207B190 (9) | |
See also: IR 05000289/1978025
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:: . .- ~ - U.S. NUCLEAR ~ REGULATORY COMMI(uGN _ - ' ' - OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
. J RegjpnI 17Nor/cg 50-289/78-25 ~' . MN 19, g Report No. 50-320/78-38 50-289 ~ l*4'iANCE'N NOT oU ACCoaoANce WI4/Nco ' ~ Docket No. 50-320 DPR-50 TH ~ " - Categork W 3 C License No. DPR-73 Priority -- -v Licensee: Metrocalitan Edison Comcany I .. P. O. Box 542 . Reading, Pennsylvania 19640 Facility Name: T' ee Mile Island 1 and 2 Inspection at: Middletown, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted: December 12-15, 1978 WN /- //- 79 Inspectors: - L. W. Gage #,ReadtorInspector cate' signed care signec ca:e signed Approved by: M:f{ 6 ,_./ / / ,/ 8 4 /w e r M 79 s S. D. Ebneter, Chief, Engineering Support j ca: 'siened Section No. 2, RC & ES Branch " Ins:ection Su=ary: Inscection on December 12-15, 1978 (Recort Nos. 50-289/78-25 and 50-320/78-38) Areas Inscected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the fire prevention / oro ec:1on orogram including work control procedures, quality assurance surveillance, design change controls, fire training and drills, emergency shutdown procedures, fire inspection reports, technical specification surveillance documentation, Safety Evaluation Report implementation, and facility inspection. The inspection involved 31 inspection hours onsite by one NRC regional based inspector. Results: Of the nine areas inspected, no items of ncncompliance were iden- tified in six areas; three apparent items of noncomoliance were identified in :nree areas. (Infraction-faiiure to control combustibles - Para. 8; Deficiency - failure to fully implement procedures - Para. 9; and Infraction - . - - failure to implement a SER commitment - Para.10) < bi3261 ' negion I For n 12 .. . . i .. (Rev. April 77) ._ 7908230 W;t =g = _ ._
D..&. ;. *_. .==-Mr.tWWM-ry6 5 -2-%z=c2 ==k.M + . - = ~r ; . - ' a:Q: .- r_ 3--}YL'.3.wj@;_qQ.:=.w.3L ::& . ~x1 := '- .-:--. -- - . , - . . . . . . pETAILS . 3 g&gbiG? 2 l w di Itjj!gh p) 1. Persons Contacted - Princioal Licensee Emoloyees Mr. R. Barley, Unit 1 Lead Mechanical Engineer . Mr. C. Hartman, Lead Electrical Engineer Mr. G. Kunder, Unit 2 Superintendent, Technical Support Mr. J. Logan, Unit 2 Superintendent Mr. T. Mackey,Jr. , Supervisor, Quality Control Mr. F. McCormick, Group Supervisor, Technical Training Mr. T. O'Connor, Sr. Tech. Analyst, Unit 1 ~' Mr. M. Ross, Super. visor of Operations, Unit 1 (All present at exit interview). 2. Work Control Procedures The insoector verified that there is a work-control procedure wnich defines requirements for operations personnel approval and control of modification activities. It is Station Administrative Procedure 1021, " Plant Modifications," Revision 2, dated Ncvember 22, 1978. Major / minor change / modification requests must have the Unit Superintendent's review and approval. No items of ncnccmpliance were identified. 3. Quality Assurance Surveillance a. Procedures ' ~ .. The inspector verified that there are cuality assurance cro- cedures that require periodic surveillance and audit of authori:ed modification and maintenance activities to verify compliance witn established controls. The crocedures include: ~ GP-40le, "OQA Audit Program,". Revision 4,_ Change 2, dated . . November 27, 1978. ' " . . _ . . . . . _ GP-1008, " Systems Lists," Revision 2, Change 1, dated . December 1, 1978. . _ . - n..mm. w.
p , a e .. . _ ( . . - ,, - ,-. _ . .3 - - _ _- _. r- r ~ _ -- . . c . b'[ . . . , . . .. .$ ~~ . . . . , _ . ~~.S.I.[ ' ~ - . . . . - . , -- . . , - . ....t .... . j.~. .-.=_ ..-.~. 1 :':. . ........**....m. .. ~~..4 ~ 'x - 3_
- . .
. = - - - . :- - - ~ ~ * = - - - -. _ _
_%. _ : _p i ~ '
7_- . < ., - _ . . - _ r_ - ~ . .* 3 _ ,. - F t _- .. .. The inspector also verified that there is a quality assurance _ procedure for performing an audit of the station's fire pro- ..." tection program. It is: Opcrational Quality Assurance Plan for TMI Nuclear Sta- . tion, Revision 7 dated December 6,1977. . b. Records The inspector reviewed the licensee's documentation to deter- mine if the above procedures were being implemented. He selected the following work requests from the Lag of Work Requests: 25341, 25342, 25518 and 25563. (These are work requests whose short descripticn indicated probable involvement with fire protection) . The inspector also reviewed the most recen: licensee OA audit of the station's fire protection program: Number 77-21, fdr 1977. (The 1978 audit, Number 78-28, was in progress during the inspection.) No items of noncompliance were identified. 4. Desicn Chance Controls The inspector reviewed the status of unresolved item 77-29-02: cable penetration seals of control-rocm cabinets in Uni: 1 (Reference IE Inspection Report No. 50-289/77-29). The licensee stated that his Report No. IR-77-29-02 was being reviewed by his design engineering group; that it may result in a new procedure for sealing the cable penetrations using a Dow Corning silicone foam; and that the com- cletion date for the review was Sectember 30, 1979. (At present, the Unit I control-rocm-cabinet cable penetrations are sealed only with Kaowool, while the drawing (C201-129) shows a typical floor seal to consis'. of a marinite board-Kaowool-marinite beard sandwich; the Unit 2 cable cenetrations are sealed with sili- cone foam, in accorcance with Chemtrol Corp. procedure 3250, "In- stallation of CT-18 Silicone Foam.") This item is still considered to be unresolved, pending review by an NRC inspector of new procedures, drawings and resealing curing a subsequent inspection. (77-29-02) .. 4 &s..sW. < ! '/8926M 1 -- . . _ . . - . . . .: . :.* * ' ' ' ' ~ - _ . . . . __ . - . - - --
- - , (:._. _ ;. . _ . _ . . - ' . . . . . . . 4
- ..--
t
.. 5. Fire Fichtina Procedures, Traininc and Drills
a. Procedures The inspector verified that the following procedures were established for fire cuntrol: . AP-1004, " Fire Emergency Plan," Revision 3, June 20, . 1977. . EP-1202-31, " Fire," Revision 8, Novembe.' 1,1978. . OP-1104-45, " Fire Protection," Revision 22, September 22, 1978. AP-1038, " Administrative Centrois--Fire ?rotection Pro- . gram Plan," Revision 0, May 10, 1978. b. Trainino Records The inspector verified that all members of the staticn fire brigade received fire prevention / protection training in accord- ance with licensee precedures EP 1202-31 and AP-1038. (Veri f- ication was based cn a review of the licensee's latest cceputer printout, " Staff Training Status ," dated Octcber 31,1978; a review of the training sessicn attendance sheets (to verify the ccmputer printout); and a review of the purchase requisition 1CO-0153-TG (to verify that the centracted training instructor was certified by the Pennsylvania State Fire School). c. Drills The inspector reviewed the licensee's fire-drill documentation (operations form CPS-5107) to verify that eaca shift tack part in a fire drill at least once every 3 mcnths, in accord- ance with licensee requirements. No items of nonccmpliance were identified. . . . .w...ei . _ . .m.e. _ . . . . _ . . . . .
t .;- _i ==l-W- . ,- + .w:CL:.: ~ ; T - : .. . L' -? - ~ L ~- -:.._ w = &-.. ] ~ ' .~.- - .- . _1- - S '-i . h -Xc a L.-y - nr.s;.__ % -" . h. . . - - 7 . ,.:_ . . . . . . .. , d ad 6. Fire Inscection Reoort . ' The inspector reviewed the most recent fire inspection report of e.se.+ the American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), the licensee's fire insurer. This report, numbe- N-155, dated February 2 and 9, and March 3 and 13, 1978 contained one new recerm:endation for Unit 1 and one for - Unit 2. The licensee has agreed to implement the rect 2ndations . No items of ncncompliance were identifier. 7. Emercency Shutdown Procedures The inspector verified that there are plant crocedures that provide alternate methods for acccmplishing an orderly plant shutdcwn and cooldown in case of loss of normal coolant-supply systems. The proccdures, for Unit 1, are: 1102-13, " Decay Heat Removal by OTSG," Revision a (May 16, -- 1977) 1106-6, " Emergency ~eed," Revision 11 (January 5,1978) -- 1202-2, " Station Blackout and Station Blackout with Loss of -- both Diesei Generators," Revision 9 (March 31,1978) -- 1202-6, " Loss of Reactor Ccolant/RCS Pressure," Revision 7 IMay 19, 1978) 1202 l', " Loss of Reactor Flow /RC Pump Trip," Revision 3 -- (August 18,1975) 1202-26A,' " Loss of Steam Generator Feed ta 30th OTSGs," Re- -- vision 3 (October 26,1976) 1202-265, " Loss of Steam Generator Feed to Or e OTSG," Revision -- 4 (September 2E, 1978) ' ' 12C2-35, " Loss of Decay Hea: Removal System," Revision 2 . -- (August 27,1974) ' ' . 1 1203-15, " Loss of RC Makeup," Revision 4 (September 27,1977) -- . . . . - , g e , - = * . ' ~ ~ . _ ~ . . . c .- -- . - " -
. - ,- .- _- , - _ _ _ . _ _ >* : - ,. , _ - ' - "- -- -.M.. - , , . _ - . . - . , ,, _f - ,
%,* -- ,#.e .- , -=*#* % > ' ' ' ' - - , w_ " [ -[ , - , _ . ,- - _ - ' _ . ' . , - -. e ~ - _ ,_, .. __ s. _ , . _ . - - .. 1- u , , , . , .
- .
_ .<. _ _ . . . . - .- - - - ~ . ., _ _.._..'; . Z. . . . . _-. - .~1._..-. - - - - - ' .---..: -' _ _ '. _ _ . - ;- .:- ' - - - - --- - . ff- - -fj.f '-{{ f-- (Z[.D f_?i3 ^ j
- -~~'f. ^^ Y ' $ : -~
{ .. ._
- -
-y'~'. ' ..:-...... -;----,-,.----.-~--:-
.--..:=......-.-.=.:----
. - - -
. . , - L 6 - - y! .. p. . E i. - The procedures, for Unit 2, are: . . . . , 2102-3.3, " Decay Heat Removal Via OTSG," Revision 6, (April -- 17, 1978) ~~ 2104-6.3, "Ecergency Feedwater," Revision 4, (June 8,1978) -- 2202-2.1, " Station Blackout," Revision 7, (June 21,1978) ._.. -- 2202-2.5, " Station Blackout with Lo cf Diesels," Revision 6, -- (September 22,1978) 2202-1.3, " Loss of Reactor Coolant /RCS Pressure," Revision ll, -- (October 6, 1978) 2202-1.4, " Loss of RC Ficw/RC Pump Trip," Revision 6, (October -- - 12,1978) 2202-2.2, " Loss of Steam Generator Feed," Revision 3, (October -- 13, 1978) 2202-1.8, " Loss of Decay Heat Removal," Revision 2, (January -- 5,1978) 2203-1.5, " Loss of RC Makeup," Revision 2, (Sectember 7, 1978) -- No items of nonccmpliance were identified. 8. Facili ty Insoection ..+.e -. The inspector conducted an inspection, in each unit, of the Control - Room, Cable Screading Rocm, Battery Rooms, Diesel Generator Rocms, Auxiliary Building, Fire Water Pumaing Station, and outside Hose Houses. Items examined included the fire alarming system, control room cabinet interiors, and fixed and portable fire fighting equipment. During the inspection of the cable spreading rocm in Unit 2 the inscector noted empty cardboard boxes stored in the area, recording paper stacked on temporary tables, and a hot soldering iron plugged into an outlet near the recording paper. The licensee did not have any personnel in the area at the time. ... , , $ _ , , , , .. . . . . . . . . . - -. - - - - - - I ' "" . ~"**'~^2.. . . . . . . . . ' ' ~ ~ , . . . , . . . .
.:. .=> > , - - . ~ . .- -- = . . . - - " - _ * .- . . . _ . x- : ~. - - q _,}.,._-k ~.7 - _ _ -. ~ ; f * A- --W j '$r- . _ Z je_ - . y-_. f -~ d ~ -- .
- ...=
~ - .- S : r. __- [- * _ Q - g 1 2.s z y g : ^ ' ' * 7 4. - - - ~,- - " '"
- -
.. . . _ y /._ . - -
. . The inspector considered this contrary to the licensee's procedur. AP-1034, " Control of Combustible Materials," (Rev. 0) which states in paragraph 6.3: "Should it become necessary. . .to exceed the limits (of transient combustible material) for brief periods, the . . _ . . cognizant department head.. .must qualitatively evaluate any addi- tional portable or temporary fire protection measures which must be taken in the area. ..while the limit...is exceeded, the area must be c manned, or a fire watch patrol...at least once per hour be established. ' (The licensee had not performed an evaluation or established a fire watch patrol). The inspector tnen cited the licensee for an Infraction to Appendix A to License No. DPR-73, paragraph 6.8.1, which states: "Wri tten procedures shall be established, implemented and maintained..." (78-38-01) 9. Technical Soecification Surveillance Tests The inspector reviewed the results of the surveillance tests per- formed on fire prevention / protection equipment in accordance with Appendix "A" to License Nos. DPR-50 and DPR-73. He samoled the follcwing test reports for the calendar year 1978: 1303-12.14, 1301 -12.2, 1303-12.13, 1301 -4.1. 2331-Ml m 3301-W1.,_2._233-SA2, 2333- A1, 2331-SA2, 3301-W2 and 3303-A1. The inspector noted that the September 18, 1978 issue of surveil- lance recort 3303-M1 indicated a failure to comolete steps 3.a, b and c (the manual I start function test fcr the fire cumo diesel engine). Work Request No. 25237 was issued, which indicated that . the diesel engine was repaired. Mcwever, it did not indicate that steps 3.a, b and c were then satisfactorily perfor ed. The in- scector'noted that neither the shift supervisor nor the test coor- dinatcr had signed the front page of the Septemcer la report to indicate that they had evaluated the test results. He thereucon rechecked the surveillance recort file, but did not find any ratest report for the month of Septemcer. The inspector .cens1& red this contrary to the licensee's procedure . AP-1010, " Technical Specification Surveillance Program," (Rev.12) which states, in paragraph 6.6.1: - A retest is required wnen -- " initial test results fai1 to meet the acceptance criteria or when the test could not be entirely performed. Retest results will be recorded on another set of data sheets or in the retest section of ' a Work Request. . Retest resu'ts will be.. . evaluated, along with the . cricinal data sheets, by the Test Coordinator to determine that the " = - - surveillance requirement has. been satis fied." ~ - _ .. . " w 8' ' m -* ' _. . ' - ~ $Mj26 F .. _. -. . ~. . . . . . . ~ ~ . . , ,- .. _ . ~ . . -}- ~ Q .. - - . . ... . -- . .._._.:._- ~ (_' -- _ . ~ .. _ .- . _ y , . . . _ _ s - .- .. - _. -- -- - - ~__ .' . . _ . .
- _ ... .- .?. ~ 'C'_. - . . . . _ _- . ~ _ . _ _ - , , . . . . . . . ._.,.l',-^! .. '~~ 2 " ' - * . _ g .. _. . _ - . , m . ... . .. _ - . . - .
1 __ .-_ . . ;.
.c _ h.- , _ _ .- . c 1~ ~ ~~_ - -C . .. _. . h:} - - . - - _ . . . . _ . .
- .- -- - ,, -( . . - - - , - - ~ 8 gF . t= The inspector cited the licensee for a Deficiency to Appendix A to # License No. OPR-73, paragraph 4. 7.10.1.2(a)2, which states: "Each ' fire pump diesel engine shall be demonstrated operable at least once per 31 days: . . .The diesel starts from ambient conditions and operates for at least 20 minutes." (78-38-02) (The next (October,1978) surveillance report 3303-M1 indicated satisfactory completion of steps 3.a, b and c, verifying a satisfac- tory repair of the diesel engine).. 10. Fire Protection Saf. ty Evaluation Recort (SER) ~ The inspector examined the implementation of the modifications for additional fire protection that were specified in the SERs for Units 1 and 2. For Unit 1, the comoleted modifications that were examined included (Reference Amendment 4a to the Operating License DPR-50): Administrative controls to prohibit smoking in safety-related . areas (Paragrach 3.1.18 of SER). ' Administrative controls to control. combustibles (Paragraph . 3.1.19 of SER). For Unit 2, the completed modificaticns that were examined included (Reference Paragraph G of Attachment 2 ta the Ocerat ng License DPR-73): Relocating existing fire detectors in the control roca. . Providing a grease filter and portable extinguisher in the . control rocm kitchen area. Prohibit smoking -in safety related areas. . Provide fire fighters with protective clothing. . Provide additional emergency lighting. . .. The inspector noted that, although there were two emergency-light - units in the cable spreading roca (above the doorways), neither t_ served to . illuminate the remote shutdowr, panel. The inspector considered this contrary to the requirenents of the Operating License, which states *in Attachment 2, paragraph G.9: "By July 31, 1978: - Provide additional fixec: sealed-beam emergency lights to i facilitate-emergency operation-'at remote shutdown panels and facilities. .." The. inspector then cited .the licensee for an Infrac} ion to Attachment _
2 to LicenseJNo. DPR-73. (78-38-03) . ~ - ' . _ - . _ . - f- - _ - _ . , ' _~ [ _ - - - ' - x- - -, . . . . . . .- " (
y . ., . . _ . _. . es - - - - - . . . , - -
. ,. ~ . = .. . . _ ._ % , ._-e g-* gm. +e . _ e medme$ die "m** M'-
.L .. . , , ,,.- e :. : . ;_E ;-7 : =--h--. :-- .. " ~~ =_-;=.:. . - ~~ ~. . . .. . . ..'.T:=~" " * * * * "
'
" . _ . . ibb. . ;-- .~e.- ---~== --;- -
' _ . . - 9
- :. ..
. i. : - J... 11. Unresolved Items Unresolved itere are matters about which more information is re- quired in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable iters, ~~ items of nonccmpliance or deviations. Unresc1ved items reviewed during the inspection are discussed in Paragra.;h 4. 12. Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para- graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's findings. . -e. Y8927D i i. _ _ ... .- -.. . . - - ._ -- i ~ :. .. N ., ....$--..-.-- . ~ . - --
.f(#- %,a / ' UNITED STATES W 4 Q/ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS[.JW - _ . .- - - -- . ' p ~- .
- .
g . Q(g$ c' . b _ . - j REGION I . . . . %jeg, [g 831*^aKAveNuc . , y g ., e xiNa CF PRUSSI A. PENNSYt.V ANI A 19406 . %,s JM 17 W I 1:. W Docket Nos. 50-289_ (" 50-32 .- Metropolitan Edison Company AiTN: Mr. J. G. Herbein .." Vice President - Generation P. O. Box 542 . Reading, Pennsylvania 19640 2 - Gentlemen: Subject: Inspection 50-239/7C-25and50-320/78-38) Y d This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. L. Gage of this office on Decemoer 12-15, 1978, at Middletown, Pennsylvania, (Three Mile Island Units i and 2), of activities authorized by NRC License Nos. DPR-50 and DPR-73 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Gage with Mr. J. Logan of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. Areas examined during this inspection are described in the Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspecticn Recort wnich is enclosed with this letter. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and reoresentative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector. Based on the results of this inspection, it appears that certain of your ~ activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set forth in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A. These items of noncompliance have been categorized into the levels as described in our correspondence to you dated Cecember 31, '974. This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Coce of Feceral Regulations. Sec. ion 2.201 requires you to submit to this office, within 0.venty (20) days of your receipt of this notice, a written statement or explanation in reply including: (1) corrective steos which have been taken by you and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which will be taken to aveid further items of noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part ?, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the er closures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this rsport contains any infor ation that you (or your contractor) believe to "r . t. ._m
mue,aa 7907poFM . h g h d _h- - T , _ .. , , , . . . . . . . . . . . .
S <, s _. l . g' .. - . _. ._ _ u j'.. _ Metr'opolitan Edison Ccmpany '2
'- '- - . ~ . . . ., . . . . . , . __ be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written cpplication ~ within 20 days to this office to withhald such information frem public disclosure. Any such application must be acccmpanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information, which identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a statement of reasons which addresses with specificity the items which will be considered by _ the Commission as listed in subparagraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790. The ' information sought to be withheld snall be incorporated as far as cossible into a separate part of the affidavit.. If we do not hear frem you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Rocm. Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you. Sincerely, f k f I/ lRober:T.Cariscn, Chief Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Enclosures: 1. Aapendix A, Notice of Violation 2. Office of Inspection and Enforcement Ins::ection Report Numbers 50-2S9/78-25 and 50-320/78-38 cc w/encls: E. G. Wallace, Licensing Manager J. J. Barton, Project Manager R. C. Arnold, Vice President, Generation L. L. Lawyer, Manager, Generation Operations - Nuclear G. P. Miller, Superintendent J. L. Seelinger, Unit i Superintendent J. 3. Logan, Unit 2 Superintendent G. A. Kunder, Unit 2 Superintendent - Technical Support I. R. Finfrock, Jr. Mr. R. Conrad G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire Miss Mary V. Southard, Chairman, Citizens for a Safe Environment (Without Report) _ . t ,. . b ,es n gd - . . . . . . - . . - eamissur-.. -- - _ .a. se. }}