ML19276H296
| ML19276H296 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/03/1972 |
| From: | Brunner E, Mcleod B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276H275 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-72-05, 50-289-72-5, NUDOCS 7910160640 | |
| Download: ML19276H296 (9) | |
See also: IR 05000289/1972005
Text
'
.?
.
.
9
U.
S'. ATOMIC ENERGY C0'O!ISSION
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE
REGION I
CO Inspection Report No. 50-289/72- 05
.
Subject: lietronolitan Edison Company
~
Three Mile Island 1
License No. CPPR-40
Location: Middletown, Pennsv1vania
Priority
Category
B
.
Type of Licensee: Power Reactor (PJR)
Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced
.
Dates of Inspection: March 20-22
1972
Dates of Previous Inspection: March 8 & 9, 1972
3--3-72___
Principal Inspector:
/
_#5
B.'K. McLeod, Reactor Inspector
Late
'
Accompanying Inspectors: none
Date
Date
Other Accompanying Personnel: None
Date
,
5'O^>
Reviewed By:
- -
ad
Date
E. J Brunner, Senior Reactor Inspector
Proprietary Information:
Mcnn
h
f3h
7910160
g.
r
--
,,.
Section I
G
Enforcement Action
None
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Matters
No enforcement items were identified in the previous Startup and Testing
Program Inspection Report.
.
Unresolved Items
None
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items
No unresolved items were identified in the previous Startup and Testing
Program Inspection Report.
Unusual Occurrences
.
None
Persons Contacted
Metropolitan Edison Company
J. L. Wise, Station Superintendent
J. Colitz, Supervisor of Operations
R. W. Zechman, Training Coordinator
.
General Public Utilities Service Company
J. J. Barton, Startup and Test Manager
T. W. Hawkins, Startup Engineer
Burns & Roe, Inc
N. E. Dickinson
Management Interviev
On March 21, 1972, a management interview was held with Mr. J. J. Barton.
The following items were discussed:
O
' i<i9.i5,
m;
.. -
.
-2-
Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Test and Startuo
Program
The inspector stated that no items of nonconformance or noncompliance
were observed.
He expressed concern about the schedule for development
of the Quality Assurance Program and Administrative Controls, relative
to the test schedule.
Mr. Barton stated that maximum eff6rt is being
expended to get these programs developed as rapidly as possible.
(Paragraphs 7 & 8)
On March 22, 1972, a management interview was held with Mr. J. L. Wise.
The following items were discussed:
On-Site Training Procram
The inspector stated that no items of noncompliance or nonconformance were
observed. He indicated that the lack of admini erative controls for the
On-Site Training Program, while not a citeable item due to the fact that
this program was almost entirely complete prior to the effective date of
Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, was a cause for concern.
He further stated that
any subsequent training program must be conducted in accordance with the
requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
(Paragraph 10)
Station Operating Procedures
The inspector stated that no items of nonconformance or noncompliance were
cbserved. He indicated that the C0 review of the Station Operating Pro-
cedures Program would continue and any deficiencies noted would be brought
to the licensee's attention for resolution.
Paragraph 5)
'
.
%
9
'
1419
140
.
/07
'
-
..
.
.
O
Section II
Additional Subjects Inspected. Not
Deficiencies Or Unresolved Items Were FoundIdentified In Section I, Where Nr
.
1.
General
The licensee (Mr. Barton) provided the following information
~
target dates for major plant milestones ~:
regarding
Commence Preoperational Testing - 5/72
Ready for Core Loading - 3/73
Ready for 20% power - 5/73
Ready for 100% power - 7/73
i
<
2.
Use of Membranes in Water Stora2e Tanks
I
i
The inspector inquired if Three Mile Island had any membranes i
i
water storage tanks.
'
the condensate storage tanks.Mr. Wise stated that there are membranes in
n
He also stated that there are no
.
membranes installed in any other water storage tanks.
inquired as to what surveillance program is planned to monit
e
The inspector
condition of these membranes.
or the
in time plans for equipment surveillance had not bMr. Wise indicated
ii
inspector stated that he would raise this question again at
een developed.
The
1
I
a later date.
3.
i
On-Site Trainine Program
i
of the on-site training program:The following items war
a.
,
i
on
I
classes cove ed h p riod o 10-20-69 to 9-1 -
r
am.
These
c du
of examinations covering the period of
g_ 8-
10-20-69 to
{
(3)
Examination grade r'ecords for the period of
9-18-70.
10-20-69 to
(4)
Reactor physics examinations dated 4-3-70 and 4-17-70
.
(5)
Nuclear instrumentation examination dated 8-21-70.
O
ub w
/O.?
-
.
-4-
4.
Administrative Controls for the Test and Startuo Program
a.
Personnel
Mr. Barton stated that Mr. Baker, previously the Test Superintendent,
had resigned and had not yet been replaced.
In the interim, Mr. Earton
stated that he is filling in for Mr. Baker and that GPU has contracted
with Burns 6 Roe to have N. E. Dickinson assigned to the Three Mile
Island S ::e to prepare the documents governing,the conduct of the
test program.
b.
Documentation
The inspector reviewed the following partially complete draft documents:
(1) Three Mile Island - 1 Test Manual
The master administrative control document which will be used
to control the TMI-l Test Program.
(2) Three Mile Island -1 Master Test Index (Format outline)
This document will list each system, the testing to be done on
that system, and the documents controlling each test.
(3) Test Procedure (Format outline)
This document will specify what items must be tested during the
individual test and will be used by the author of the individual
test procedure to guide him in preparation of that document.
.
(4)
Individual Test Procedure (Format outline)
This will be the procedure for the step by step conduct of each
test.
(5) Test Instruction (Format outline)
This will define the administrative controls particular to an
individual test.
Details of Subjects Discussed in Section I
5.
Station Ooeratine Procedures
a.
General
The licensee does not presently have any operating procedures in final
4
form nor is the procedure index complete; however, draft procedures
! tl}
g
-
-
.
-5-
were available in some catergories.
The inspector reviewed the following
draft procedures:
(1)
Emergency Procedure - 1202-36, Loss of Instrument Air
(2) Auxiliary System Operating Procedure 1104-11, Nuclear Service c
-
closed cooling water system.
(3) Auxiliary system operating procedure 11044 2, Decay Heat River
Water System.
The inspector reviewed his findings with Messrs. Colitz and Wise.
The deficiencies identified and the licensee's response to these
items were as follows:
.
b.
EP 1202-36 Loss of Instrument Air
.(1) Deficiency - The procedure contains no provision for signatures
of the persons approving the procedure.
Licensee Content - Mr. Wise stated that final draf ts of all
procedures will contain signatures of the persons approving
O
the procedure.
(2) Deficiency - The procedure contains no recuirement that the
operator verify that automatic actions have taken place and
to manually initiate any action that fail to function
automatically.
Licensee Ccmment - Mr. Wise stated that the emergency procedure
format will be modified to include this item.
(3) Deficiency - The procedure does not identify the plant response
to the failure.
Such information as the direction and probable
magnitude of major paramater changes should be included in
brief form.
Licensee Comment - Mr. Wise stated that consideration would be
'
to include
given to modifying the emergency procedure format
this information.
(4) Deficiency - This procedure does not cover the total loss of
instrument air situation.
The procedure assumes that instrument
air pressure decreases slowly and that specified corrective
actions return system pressure to normal.
O
%i
.
'
/ u <-
-
.
-6-
Inspector's Ccement - The inspector stated that a total and abrupt
loss of instrument air pressure is a realistic occurrance and that
this procedure should cover that possibility.
Licensee Comment - Mr. Wise stated that the procedure will be
modified to cover this possibility,
-
c.
OP 1104-32 - Decav Heat River Water System
.
Deficiency - This procedure does not have provisions for including
limits imposed by Technical Specifications.
Licensee Comment - Mr. Wisa stated that operating procecures will
include appropriate Technical Specifications limits.
.
d.
OP 1104-11 - Nuclear Service Closed Cooling Water System
Deficiency - Item 14.2.2.2, which deals with water quali y for
t
Nuclear Service closed cooling water system, references a GAI
specification which may not be readily available for operating
personnel.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated that if this information
is important it should be in the procedure; if not, it should be
eliminated.
Licensee Comment - Mr. Wise stated that this reference will be
eliminated from the procedure since all water quality require-
ments will be in the plant water chemistry procedures.
.
6.
Preoperational Test Program
The inspector reviewed an index of preoperational tests entitled:
Test Procedure List - Three Mile Island - Unit 1.
The insp2ctor discussed the results of this review with Messrs. Barton and
Digkinson.
The deficiencies noted and the licensee's response were as
rollows:
Deficiency - It was not apparent that the licensee planned to conduct
the following pre-operational tests:
Solid Waste Disposal System
Charcoal and Particulate Filter Tests
Plant Response to Loss of Instrument Air
~
y us
( U (;
'
'
(
'
..
-7-
Licensee Coment - Mr. Barton stated that these tests will be conducted.
7.
Administrative Controls for the Test and Startup Program
The inspector inquired as to the status of development of the Administra-
tive Controls for the test program. Messrs. Barton and Dickinson
indicated that work on these was in progress and that the bulk of these
controls would be in place by the start of preoperational testing in
May, 1972. The inspector stated that it was his positien that the
Administrative Controls required to assure adequate testing of components
and systems must be instituted prior to commencement of preoperational
testing.
He indicated that this area was of particular concern
to CO and that he would follow it closely.
He further stated that failure 1
have adequate Administrative Controls would most certainly result in
appropriate enforcement action being initiated.
8.
Quality Assurance for the Test and Startun Progren
The inspector inquired as to the status of development of the licensees QA
Mr. Barton
Program covering the preoperational and startup testing phases.
indicated that a Quality Assurance Program designed to comply with Appendiz
B to 10 CFR 50 is in the development stage.
Mr. Barton also stated that the
9
QA Program should be ready in June or July.
He indicated that while this d4
not coincide with the scheduled date for commencement of preoperational
testing, any further slippage in the construction schedule will move back
the preoperational testing dates and allow the QA Program to be functional
when testing is commenced. The inspector stated that it was his position
that the entire testing program must be covered by a functioning QA
Program and that failure to have the program in place at a time consistent
with the schedule for performing the activities would be a violation of
Criterion II of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
Mr. Barton indicated that he was
aware of the inspectors position on this matter.
9.
Post Erection Flushing
The inspector inquired as to the status of development of post erection
flushing procedures.
Mr. Barton stated that none were yet in final form.
Mr. Barton described plans for post erection flushing procedures as follows:
Generic procedures for the different types of flushfr.g will be written
and approved by the Test Working Group (TWG).
From these generic
procedures individual flush procedures will be written and used in
conjunction with marked up flow diagrams to control the conduct of
the individual tests. These will not be approved by the TWG but
O
1419 ]45
'
lC;I
'*
-
.
-8-
rather by representatives of GAI, B&W, UE&C and GPU.
The inspector reviewed a draft Individual Flush Procedure for the Decay
Heat Closed Cycle Cooling Water System.
The inspector noted that the
acceptance criteria did not define the flow velocity required to produce
After discussion with the inspector, Mr. Barton agreed
an adequate flush.
that minimum flow velocities would be defined in flush procedures for
major piping runs.
,
10. On-Site Trainina Program
The inspector stated that he wished to review the Administrative Centrols
He stated that he was specifically
for the Operator Training Program.
interested in documentation which defines:
Responsibilities for the preparation and conduct of training lectures
.
Responsibilities and guidelines for the evaluation of training
effectiveness
.
Record requirements
Mr. Zechman stated that there were no administrative control documents
for the Operator Training
.
s
O
mnW
.