ML19322D927
| ML19322D927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/28/1978 |
| From: | Kirk I NRC OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS (MPA) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS (MPA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322D920 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003110222 | |
| Download: ML19322D927 (3) | |
Text
r 1
p.g s.
e - t..
Reference 19 4
[ an arc \\
i UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
... j WASHIN GTON, D. C. 20555
.o '".K -.
Ej
<, -GM,c SEP 2 01973 l
l
.Those on Attached List i
COMPlTTER LISTIfiGS OF LICENSEE EVEtiT REPORTS SORTED BY FACILITY I
The enclosed computer listing provides information concerning i
licensee event reports entered into the file during the month l
of Septerrber.
If you desire additional information or special searches, please do not hesitate to contact us.
j,- < 4,/ /
/
,~
- 4. A. Kirk, Chief Automated Systems Branch Division of Technical Support Office of Management and Program Analysis
Enclosure:
As stated 0
4 e
58BiHBE4'MRd3issainGMP&WSEMiliM@f5A# FREE
aq(
~
- 3:, ' 3. r (.
((
- hpyd..M. d
.%35DN 2Ni; sh-SEP 26 1978
,y.
LER H0HillLY OUTPUT SORTED SY FACILITY JK PROCESSPD DURING SEPTEMBER FOR POWER REACTORS PA08 48 FACILITY /SYSTEN/ COMP 0HENT/
DOCKET H0./
EVElli DATE/
s ' r ".7 5
'71 COMP 0HElli SUSCOOC/CAUSE CODE / L[R HO./
REPORT DAlt/
' y d ' $ p; CAUSE SUSCODE/MANUPACTURER CONTROL HQ.
REPORT 1YPE EVENT DESCRIPTION /
CAUlf DESCRIPTIDH V. 6 O U' h
%.b'.
TI REE ti!L E ISL AND-1 05000289 060578 PERFORMlll0 SP 1303-5.8 REACTOR BLDO. COOL ANT AHD 150 SYS LOGIC CHANNEL AIR COND. HEAT. COOL.VElli SYSTEM 78-019/03L-0 062278 g y.
RCtAYS COMP 0HEHT TEST CONTROL FUST GPENED AND RB-V-7 DID HOT OPER ATE.
't 021954 30-DAY DLDO.
COOLING SYS IS A CLOSED SYS INSIDE REACTOR BLDO.
THUS H0 THREAi PEACT06 OIHLR
'i COHP0HCHT FAILU'tE 1011EALTH A11D SAFETY OF PUBLIC EXISTED WilILE VALVE WAS OUT OP SERVICE 9g
' M,I d r, W ELICTRICAL REPORT ABL E PER T.S. 6.9.2.B.(2) AND REPRESENTS DEORADED tt0DE UtIDER T.S.
ui-g OTH:R 3.4.6. LER 77-84 REPORi[D A S!?1ILAR EVCHI.
CS sit J
<'lrj'9.{
VALVE FAILED DUE TO Blouti FUSE IX CONTROL CIRCUIT. VOLTAGE SPIKE SUPPR6 5510H CittVRECTOR) ACROSS THE COIL OF AN AUXILI ARY REL AY FAILED CAUSING !
pMY
.4 HORT CIRCUII.
Il!YRECTOR REPLACED AND VALVE FUNCTI0ttED AS DESIGHED. VA1
'@.*7f A VE RETURiiED TO FULL DPERABILITY WITHIH 24 il0DRS.
'. En%
TilREE t1IL E ISL AHD-l 0$000289 061478 SEVEN OF tilflE COHIROL RODS IN OROUP 3 IHADVERTANILY DROPPED IHTO CORE Rt f
REACTIVITY CONTROL SYSTEH5 78-020/0tT-4 062878
$ @F4k f&i CONTROL R0D DRIVE NECHANISMS 021953 2-WEEK SUL T1HG Ill DPERATION Willi NORE THAH ONE IHOPER ABLE ROD PER T.S. 4.7. I.2.
VIOLATION OF T.S. 3.5.2.2.A. AND ROD IHDEX LIMITS OF 1.S. 3.5.2.5.E.
SunCat1PONCHT fl0i APPLICABLE D 1,th COMPONENT FAILURE DURlHO rott0WIHO IR AH5f Elli QUADR ANT POWER Illi LittIT OF T.S. S.S.2.4.A 1 45 W ELECTRICAL A5 EXCEtDED BUT RETUP:!ED 10 ACCEPTABLE VALUE IN TOUR I!OUR$. POWER REOU iD.$ p a
DIAN0flD POWER SPECIALTY CORP.
ED 10 40% INMEDI ATELY AHD C0lliROL R00 ASYMt1ETRY CLEARED IN O!!E HOUR W SitUIDOWH PAROTH ABOVE IX DELTA X/K..
a 24 DROPPED RODS CAUSED BY 5HORIED DIODE IN DC HOLD SECONDARY POWER SUPP Sil0R TED DIODE AND BLOWN FUSES C AUSED LOW VOL TAGE FROM SECONDARY p
WHCll 1Rtr BREARERS TOR MAlti
~
"f S DROPI'CD BECAUSE OF LOW VOLTAGE. SUPPLY TC5ftD DURIllo RPS SURVEILLA AVE FORMS CHECKED.
FUSES AlfD DIOD.E R[PL ACED AllD OUTPUT l.
r THREE MILE ISLAHD-t 03000289 072378 DISCOVERED AT 1452 A ENER0EllCY DIESEL GEtIERATOR AIR VALVE IIAD BEEH TA001
[ HERO CEHERAIOR SYS + COHIROLS 78-022/03L-0 088175 D Shui Al t il5 DURil10 IET SYS 11AlH1[ HANCE RENDERING A DIESEL IHOPERABLE.
VALVES 022034 30-DAY U
1 OTHER C0HIRARY 10 T5 3.7.2.C. REDUNDANT DIESEL WAS HOT It1NEDIATF.LY TESTED.
REPORTABLE PER TS 6.9.2.8.(3).
8 DIESEL HAS SUCCESSFULLY TESTED. A Dit
. Dff.y PER50tlHEL ERROR
- 'Af g LICENSED & SEtIIOR OPERATORS SEL WAS RETURilED 10 SERVICE UP0H COMPLETION OF Ils REQUIRED SURVEILLAHC
..M h E.
ITEN HOT APPLICABLE HQ THREAT 10 HEALTH AND SAFETY OF Tile PUBLIC.
CVk f6 CAUSE FOR TAGGIHO OUT A DIESEL WITHOUT TESTIHO B DIESEL WAS PERSOHHE
- @Sh+
RDR.
ALL PERSOHilEL llAVE BEEH INFORMED OF TilEIR IMPROPER ACTIONS. ALL L.
. h.,
.re,
PERATIDHS DEPARIMEHT PER50HHEL HAVE BEEN REBRIEFED OH IMPORIANCE OF P ER TESTING OF'REDUllDANT E5 SYSTEtt$.
il h % 5 IfiREE NILE ISLAND-1 0$000289 080778
- q iri REACTOR VES.
- APPURTErlANCES 78-024/0IT-0 082178 MET-CD RECEIVED 't0TIFICATION FROM SIM TIIAT WELD FILLER WIRE ATYPICAL 0F
)
VESSELS PRESSURE 022053 2-WEEK WIRE SPECIFIED BY BIW NAY HAVE BEEll USED IH CONSTRUCTIDH OF THE THI-t R REACTOItVESSEL ACTOR VESSEL. REPORTABLE PER T.S. 6.1.2.A.(9).
Tile STRUCIURAL INTEGRI) u
- T
- DESIGH/FADRICATIDH ERROR Y OF file VESSEL Is NOT COMPROMISED AND HO filREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH A NAfiUF A C T UR Ilf o rEIY 15 IfiVOLVED.
8 N5 BADCOCK t WILCOX COMPAHY M:
e*..
ATYPICAL HELD WIRE WAS UNKHOWINGLY fi!XED BY THE SUPPLIER IN A SHIPMElli L sg.
y[g F WIRC to Stu.
Blu DISC 0V[ RED THIS CONDITICH DURIll0 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS C F ARCllIVE WELDNEllIS.
WHILE A-REVISED TECil $PEC IS BE1HO PREPARED, PREL1 m
f HIIIARY INFORMAT10ll $UPPLIED BY 81H WILL BE USED 10 00VERH P-T llEAT
,i 00LDOWN.
O,, 1 M.
-me p
1 N
'SEP 26, 1978 LER MOHillLY OUTPUT 50RTED BY FACILITY PAGE 46 PROCESSED DURING SEPTEMBER FOR POWER REACTORS FACILITY /$YSTEH/ COMPONENT /
DOCKET HO./
EVENT DATE/
C0f1P0llEN T SUSC00E/C AUSE CODE / L ER fl0. /
RLi'URI DAIE/
EVENT DESCRIPTION /
CAU5E SUSCODE/NAHUFACTURER C0HIROL HD.
REPORT TYPE CAUSE DESCRIPTIDH j
I
- ~..
05000320\\g 1HREE hit E 15L AllD-2 032978 IN N00E 2 VITAL BUS 2-IV BECAME DE-ENER0! ZED REQUIRING OPERATIDH IN ACT!
AC Oll51TE POWER SYS + CONTROLS 78-021/03L-0 5050878 ON STAI[ MENT TO T.S. 3. 8. 2. t. 3.3.2.1 (TABLE 3.3-3 ITENS 3A AND 33), 3.3 INS T Rutl[tll A T Ioli 6 CONTROLS 02t152 0-DAY
.3.5, AHD 3.3.3.6.
180 ADVER5E S AFETY CollCERH5.. REACIOR TRIPPED, ECCS FU COHIROLLLR C0t1P0HEHT FAI' tRE flCTI0tlED PER DESI0tl. AllD VITAL BUS WAS RE-EllER0! ZED WITillit TINE FRAME OF ELECTRONIC APPLICABLE ACTIDH STAT [MENTS RETURHillo AFFECTED EQUIPMLHT TO OPERABLE S TATUS.
Sut ID SI AIE ColliROLS, IllC.
VITAL BUS INVERTER FAIL ED TO FutfCTION PROPERLY Ill FREE Rtitttillto NODE.
Wil Elf AL TER!IATE ( AC) SOUNCE TRIPPED DURIN0 SFAS TESilHG RESULTIllG IN BLOWN FUSE Oil DC IllPUT.
ALTERHATE SOURCE AC BREAKER MAS CLOSED, EllERGIZIHQ VI TAL RUS AND FAULTY IllVERTER C0llIROL MODULE AllD FUSE WERE REPL ACED.
THREE NILE' ISLAND-2 05000520 0409T8 FLOOR FIRE BARRIER PEHE1RATIDH SEAL BETWEEH RELAY ROOM AllD C0HIROL R00M FIRE PROTECTIOil SYS + C0tli 78-043/03L-0 071078 DE FI CI Elli VIOLATIll0 T.S. 3.7.11 H0 C0ilDITION EXISTED WilICll REQUIRED TH COMP 0HElli CODE HOT APPLICABLE 021980 30-DAY E OPERADILITY of illE FIRE SEAL.
NO TilREAT TO llEAlitt AllD SAFETY OF PUBLI SUBCONPONEHi NOT APPLICABLE C.
DESIGH/ FABRICATION ERROR
/
C 0!!5 TRUC T I0fi/IHS T A L L A T ION ITEM HOT APPLICA4LE q
IMPROPERLY CtlRED FOAM HATERI AL HAS USED TO NAKE Tile 5EAL. CONT!!!UGUS FI RE WATCil WAS P0$TED. DEFICIENT BARRIER REPAIRED AllD RETURNED TO FUNCTIO HAL STATUS.
TilREE HILE ISLAND-2 05000320 063078 TH N00E 6, 4/29/78, AT 5430, A DIE 5EL OEHERATOR PLACED IH ENER0EHCY STAN ENERO GENERAIPR SYS + CONTROLS 78-044/03L-0 472478 DBY 6/30/78 AT 1600, DISCOVERED BREAKER 02-1E2 fl0T CLOSED WHEN A D.O.
CIRCUIT CLOSERS / INTERRUPTERS 028936 30-DAY PL ACED Ill EMERGEHCY ST ANDDY C0tl5TITUTIllo VIOL ATIOH OF T.S. 3.8.1.2.
Util CIRCUIT BREAKER T IH H0DE 6, AHD H0 CORE ALTER ATI0HS OR CitANCES Ill REACTIVILTY WERE MADE DEFECTIVE PROCEDURES NOT APPLICABL E TilUS EVENT DID fl0i EFFECT llEAL'Til AllD SAFETY OF PUBLIC.
ITEN ll0T APPLICABLE PROCEDURE illADEquAC
Y. PROCEDURE
REVIl[D TO Ell 5URE C2-fE2 CLOSED WHEN A E
{l DIESEL GEHERATOR IS PLACED IH [HERGEllCY SIANDBY. APPROPRI ATE PER50HilEL WILL BE INSTRUCTED OH PROCEDURE CilANCE.
TIIREE NILE 151AtID-2 05000320 072478 DURING A FIRE BARRIER PEllETRATION SEAL VERIFICATION IH5PECTICII. A WALL P FIRE PROTECTION SYS + C0HT 78-048/03L-0 082278 EHEIRATI0tt WAS FOUND L ACKIllG A FIRE BARRIER SEAL.
IllI S 12" X 6" PEHEIRA COMP 0ff Elli CODE NOT APPLICABLE 022052 30-DAY SUBCOMP0HEHT ll0i APPLICABLE TIDH 15 LOC ATED IH iltE 50U111 WALL DF Ti!E 5WITCilGEAR ROOM Ill THE A EMERGE
~~ DESIGH/FABRICATI0tl ERROR HCY DIESEL Gell [RATOR BUILDING. SIllCE TilIS FIRE B ARRIER WA5 HDH-FUNCTIO!I AL. IT C0t:5TITUTES A VIOLATICH OF 10C11 LPEC 3.7.11 C0ll5IRUCTIOH/Ill5f ALL ATI0tl ITEM NOT APPLICABLE L ACK OF A FIRE B ARRIER SEAL IN THIS PEHEIRATIDH WAS DUE TO All 0VERSI0lli Ott THE PART OF THE C0HIRAC10R. A CONTINUGUS FIRE WATCil WAS ESTABLISHED Ill ACCORDANCE WITil TECH SPEC 3.7.11 PRIOR TO INSTALLING lilE SEAL AHD SUS SEQUE!!TLY A FIRE BARRIER SEAL WAS IH5fALLED U5I110 ANI APPROVED MATERIAL.
s cea w
e'*
~
- trb '.':.
$*! G D $
- h **
- x e*&c.T dp %a:-:.
J.
~
-i-. 7 T-NUCLEAR REG,ULATOF T*
M
- 5.l.dM).1
-.. - ' H i~+. w ;.:. i.~. x c ec a n Reference 20 n
=
- 'igagy
- ouna oe eausssA. n.nnsvt v^"*
'~~
^
5"
%* pts *
'~ t.,q
- L-p.
~.
=-
APR 241978 Docket No. 50-320 5
Is Metropolitan Edison Company FT ATTN:
Mr. J. G. Herbein E
Vice President P. O. Box 542
[.
Reading, Pennsylvania 19503 E:--
Gentiemen:
l..?
Subjec~t:
Inspection 50-320/78-15 E;
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. D. Haverkamp of this h).f office.on March 30-31 and April 5-6, 1978, at the Three Mile Island E.'
i Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Middletown, Pennsylvania, of activities authorized E
by NRC License No. DPR-73 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. S. Folsom of this office with Mr. S. Levin of your staff on March E
..._._i 31, 1978, by Mr. W. Colemn of this office wi'.h Mr. J. Seelinger of your
- -E staff on March 31, 1978, and by Mr. Haverkamp with Mr. Seelinger at the E
conclusion of the inspection.
E 'l E
Areas e:cmined during this inspection are described in the Office or E
Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report which is enclosed with this l
letter. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations.of procedures and representative records, interviews with i..
z.
personnel, and observations by the inspector.
E E
Within the scope of'this inspection, no items of noncompliance were 5
observed.
t
- =
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part F
2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is 'necessary that you make a written 3..
application within 20 days to this office to withhold such infonnation from public disclosure. Any such application must be accompanied 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 E'
of reasons which addresses with specificity the items which will.be
=-
considered by the Cocmission as listed in subparagraph (b)(4) of Section EE i 4
f
[
770 /r 5 % 5 d5
?
7
=..
55
-(..,
-(,
~
}
4
..q.-;g,-,
= -
..7____._.-
_ y. _.,
Meiroptslitan Edison CoqEny 2
~
AP.R24 E
{
2.790.
The infor: ration sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not hear froa you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
No reply to this letter is required; however, if you should have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, 0
, _)
El n. Brunner, Chief R ctor Operations and Nuclear support Branch
Enclosure:
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report 1
N'mber 50-320/78-15 cc w/ enc 1:
R. L. Llayne, QA Manager, Design & Construction T. Broughton, Safety & Licensing Manager f
R. W. Heward, Jr., Project Manager R. C. Arnold, Vice President, Generation L. L. Lawyer, Manager, Generation Operations - Nuclear G. P. Miller, Superintendent J. L Seelinger, Unit 2 Superintendent Gerald Charnoff, Esquire I. R. Finfrock, Jr.
Miss Mary V. Southard, Chairran, Citizens for a Safe Environment (Without Report) bec w/ encl:
IE Mail & Files (For Appropriate Distribution)
Central Files Public Docu:Ent Room (PDR) local Public Occurent Roca (LPOR)
Nuclear Safety Inforcation Center (llSIC)
Technical Information Center (TIC)
REG:I Reading Roo:2 Region Directors (III, IV)(Report Only)
Comaonwealth of Pennsylvania Miss Mary V. Southard, Chaircan, Citizens for a Safe Environment
-=
- ===x_:-==---==----z-
, = - - - - -
kbS. RUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMTSS1vN
- g 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT 7~
~
[
..=:=
=7 Region I I
N Report No. 50-320/78-15 g
ggpcM 1 MAS # gp noma *S
~
g op cdNM2 5 #g wgu to CfR W Occket No. 50-320 License No. OPR-73 Priority
' Category B-2 Licensee:
Petrcoolitan Edison Conrany P. O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Facility Narae:
Tnree Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 inspectf on at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania inspection conducted: March 30-31 and April 5-6, 1978 Inspectors: hf/
A /2c/72 t
D. R. Ha erkarp, Reac(dr Inspector (April 5-6) date signed y $y~t. -
tor ff20l2?
N[E. Col'edh, Reactor Inspector (March 31) date signed e
M,s,
/ 20 8
f SP Folsom, Rea tor Inspe-tor (March 30-31)
/ date' signed Approved by: k
[
if M
c2O 78 D. M. Sternberg, Actiiig Chief, Reactor
/da te' signed Projects, Section No.1,.10&NS Branch Insoection Sucary:
Insoection on. March 30-31 and.!.oril 5-5, 1978 (Recort No. 50-320/78-15)
Areas Insoected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee's action on pr%ious inspection findings; license conditions for Mode I Operation; and licensee actions concerning an ECCS actuation and infection into the RCS on March 29, 1978. The inspection involved 38 inspector-hours onsite by three NRC ihspectors.
Results:
No itects of nonconnliance were identified.
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT e'
Entire' document previously
)
pC cp entered into system under:
ANO M5$
79@W @Sd8
!l No. of pages:
7pd.
7g, ev. apri V..
-~
9,
(.
(
.. = =. -
g
~
i~
pf
!i1 1-m F
?:'
DETAILS 1
p--
1.
'Pehens 6n'tacted i
~
~~
~
E:
i Metroooiitan" sdison C6tiany E- )
Mr. P. Lydon, Shift Fore 5.an'
- tir. J. Floyd, Supervisor of Operations
- /**Mr. J. Seelinger, Unit Superintendent - Technical Support
.i.M..
~
'_ General Public Utilities Service Corporation
.=L i
- Mr. T. Block, [ead Site QA Auditor hi Mr. G. Derk, F_ield Supervisor - QC Er Mr. J. Godjeski, QA Engineer i
- Mr. S. LeYin, Site Project Engineer e
Mr. I. Portar, Lead Instrument Engineer
~
- Mr. R. Tool e, Test Superintendent Mr. J. Ulrich, Shift Test Engineer pg Catalytic, Inc.
1 J='l.
Mr. J. 'de' h, Piping Supervisor c
y Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory Mr. N. Rit.ze, QC Inspector The inspectors also talked with several other employees of the im licensee and the constructor.
~
- denotes those present at the exit interviews on_ March 31, 1978.
- denotes those present at the final exit interview on April 6, i
1973.
p' 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inscection Findinas
[9-(Closed) Unresolve'd Item 320/77-32-03:
Diesel Generator Starting.
k~
The diesel generator air starting systea modification has been
=
coroleted, and the diesels have been started 10 times without recharging froa the air cocpressors.
(Additional infonnation EE-concerning this itea is contained in Paragraph 3.b.)
!=."
Efi
- =
~5 e==-
d.
4:..
EF EE i~:.T.
._.~ _.. - - _ _ _ _- __
~
c g:-i=.: =
c
=
6:
h;;
W ~--
ffff ONl[.$N~..~N
,. 3
...:.e.
=
=~
(Closed) Inspector Folicwup Itea 320/77-42-03:
Approval of TP 600/29.
!=
.The inspector'deternined that the 1/8 inch and 7/8 inch shims for s
RC-P-IA Re'straint No.10 had been interchanged 'in accordance with
~
No. CM-557 indicated satisfactor/ disp 546., QC Inspec. tion Report E
ilork_ Aut' or'ization Notice No
?
Catalytit:
~
h
~
osition of this item. TP 600/29 E.
was subsequently final approved for Mode I operation with no out-i standing test deficiencies / exceptions.
e (Closed) Inspector Followup'Itii:1 320/78-11-01:. Voltage Level Optimiza-
- f-
~
tion.. A bus voltase measurement _ test program has been completed and i
existing transformer tap settings have been verified to be correct'.
(Additional information concerning this item is contained in Paragraph s?
3.a)
E E
(Closed)' Inspector Followup Item 320/78-11-02:
ICCW Heat Exchangers
- s Modification.
Coolers IC-C-IA and IC-C-IB have been modified so that
~
their design conforts with seismic Category I requirements.
(Additional is information concerning this item is contained in paragraph 3.c.)
g:
(Clcsed) Unresolved Item 320/78-12-02:
Structural Support Anchorage I
for Core Flood Tank CF-T-IB.
The inspector reviewed Engineering Devia -
T tion Report (EDR) No. 4704 for rrodification of the subject anchor
~
plate and observed the work in progress.
The inspector also reviewed Burns & Roe, Inc. letter to GPU, serial 4178-GP, which stated that Burns & Roe has verified tha'-
{1) The plate stress aft'er modification per EDR No. 4704 is
~
within the allowable; and l
(2)
Cut-off of wall reinforcement will not affect the structural i'
integrity of the shield wall.
[
CS-132 associated with the completed EDR No. 4704, and had no further questions concerning this item.
7 (Closed) Inspector Folicwup Item 320/78-13-02:
Housekeeping Conditions.
I The inspector toured accessible plant areas on April 6,1978, and noted that general cleanup activities were continuing, and that housekeeping 4
conditions.in the Control Building and Auxiliary Build.ing had improved is since the last inspection.
The inspector determined that cleanliness is and fire protection controls.were adequate for entering Mode I.
E
!=
%g e
.g=.
. 2.
b s.
3
- q.;
y..;. -_
pp u..
~.
4 b:.
~ -
.E.
g 3.
Review of Facility Ooeratino License DPR-73 Conditions for Mode I 5"
Oceratica The itecs discussed below were reviewed for resolution of outstanding h
conditions of the operating license.
=.
a.
Voltace Level Ootimization of Safety-Related Buses h.
References:
(1) Burns & Roe, Inc. letter to GpU, serial 4173-GP, dated March 29, 1978; (2) MEC letter to NRR,' serial GQL 0569, dated I
March 30, 1978.
=l A bus voltage reasuremant test program was conducted on March 28, 1973, as described in reference (1).
Voltage and current measure:ents were taken on various safety-related buses while observing operating loads on these buses.
These measurements were conver.ed to arrive at the actual XVA load for each bus.
A cortputer program was prepared which recreated the plant conditions during the test, and a computer printout was obtained which listed the expected bus voltage values for the same test program conditions.
Field data was then compared with the e
analytical results,' and the values were within 2.1% agreement,
-f thus establishing a level of confidence in the ability of the analytical program to predict bus voltage behavior during different piant conditions.
Analytical values of full load and no load bus voltages were obtained, and it was determined that in order to optimize voltages at various buses, transformer taps of all Unit Substation buses rr.ust be set at -2.5%, as currently exists.
Reference (2) fonvarded a report which provided the do:ucentation and confirmation of correct voltage tap settings.* Tne inspector reviewed the test methodology and i
results and referenced reports and had no further questions concerning this license condition.
- b. __ Diesel Generatcr Air Startina System Modification E
During previous testing of the diesel generators, the compressed 1
air starting system had faileu to maintain the required minimum air pressure.
Burns & Roe Engineering Change Memo (ECM) No.
E S-5366, Rev.1, provided for codification of the system to F
correct this tast deficiency.
The inspector reviewed the ECM docu:entatien., cbserved work in progress on the required modi-
=
fications, and subsequently rev'ewed the records,of satisfactory i
seismic qualification testing of the added air starting system p
regulating valves. Additionally, the inspector determined Ep E:
~
~.
= = =
=
--=-
Q. -
(
G-.* :
=.: Q
.. = =.
.6 K.%...,
u ss:.,
.<.n : ':.... -p r & - E z._.?L -._-
. 2.:
3.
5
' h-'
.u.+
that_each di.esel ge'nerator was demnstiated capable of 10 starts, without rechargjng from the air compressors, providing as
.do.umented by the final,is license condition.
approved TP 401/1.
Findings were acceptable regarding th c.
~_ICCtf Feat Exchanoe'r's' Modification Modificat! ion of the supports for the Intermediate Closed Cooling 6ter Heat Exchangers, IC-C-1 A and IC-C-IB, was necessary so that.their design conforms with seismic Category I requirements.
The inspector reyiewed.the applicable work authorization notice, nuclear safety review, and QC inspecticn report associated with the following Engineering Change Memos:
(1)
ECM lio. 5-5837 for the mdifications 1equired to the supports for IC-C-IA.
(2)
ECM's No. S-5832 and 5879 for the inspection and codification of supports for IC-C-IB.
(3)
ECM No. ~5850 for remyal o'f grout above the level of the sliding base plate for IC-C-IB.
Additionally, the ~ inspector revie'wsd ' Burns & Roe Inc. letter f
to GPU, serial 4171-GP, which stated that a seismic analysis was conpleted to qualify coolers.IC-C-IA and IC-C-1B to seismic I loading conditions, and that upon completion of the above EC4's, the coolers and attachmnts were considered to be Seismic I cualified.
The inspector determined that codifications to the cooler supports had been properly com31etad in accordance with ECM's S-5832, S-5837, 5850 and 5879, and had no furthdr questions conceming this license condition.
4.
Emercency Safecuards Actuation The insjec. tor rev.iewed the emergency safeguards (ES) actuation which occurred on l' arch 29, 1978.
The event occurred during the
. perfonrance of a. monthly ES surveillanca test.
During the surveillance test, the circuit breaker for the alterr. ate power supply to the 2-IV i
Bus was tripped (in'accordance with the procedure) and a fuse blew in the inverter which is the primary power supply to the 2-IV Bus.
The loss of power caused the reactor to trip and also opened.the pressurizer electrocatic relief valve..The relief valve caused l:.
N t
I
-m gy'
' rvcw -- -.--- _ _. ~, _. _ _ _ _ ___
t
(.
-5
~
E=7, 6
r reactor coolant system pressure to ' decrease to the ES actuation i
pressure and water was injected into the reactor coolant system.
The event terminated when the fuse was replaced in the inverter.
=
As a result of the ES actuation, high concentrations of Sodium (Na+) and of Chloride (Cl-) were injected into the reactor coolant systec. The licensee ccanenced a plant cooldown when the measured RCS chloride concentration was discovered to be 2.55 ppm on March 30, 1978.
Subsequent to the ES actuation, the RCS was determined to have had caxirum assumd concentrations of 4.0 ppm chloride,10 ppb oxygen, and 430 ppa sodium. B&W letter to GpU/ HEC, ' serial SOM-II-127 dated April 4,1973, stated that the contamination of the RCS will have no deleterious effect upon the structural integrity of the RCS F
or associated auxiliarj systems and equipment.
Therefore, the RCS recains acceptf e for continued operation.
The ?.CS cheafstr/ was returned to within specification on April 4,
~
1973, and a plant heatup was cormenced to resume low power physics testing.
During discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector deter =ined that two nodifications are currently being considered to prevent recurrence of this event.
A circuitry change is planned to
/
keep the alternate power supply connected to each vital bus in the F
event of ES channel actuation, and lighted control board position t
indicaticns will be provided for the electromatic relief valve.
The ins;Ictor reviewed the event to verify that the ES system. per-for ed as designed, that the licensee was conforming to Technical Specification requirements, that the licensee re/iewed the incident for cer.eric implications, that the licensee reviewed the event for reportability in accordance with Technical Specifications and Reg.
{
Guide 1.16, and that the licensee's plans for restoration of reactor coolant chenistry were consistent with Technical Specifications and vendor requirecents. A special report of the ES actuation will be subaitted by the licensee pumuant to T.S. 3.5.2.
The inspector i
had no further questions concerni.ng this item at this time.
Find-ings were acceptable.
t i
a e.
ma.
. ~
p 5
7 5,
_ Exit Interview E
=.;..
The ins'pe' tdr get with licens5e and contractor representatives
$i c
(denoted in Paragraph 1) pn March 31, and April 6,1978, to discuss
~
9
. the findings of the inspection.
E
=.
e
'?
9 9
..Y
+
e 9
Y 6
4
.a 4
S o 'm 5,.
1_-
f)..
E
- = -
.h5 I
- ",n...
' 75::-
~
~ ~ -
._..__.,_.m
h UNITED STATES i
u.g%
~ JUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7f d
p$5 i
.3 HEGION Reference 21
(
/
3 g, g
433 PARK A%
x No or enUS$1 A. PENN 43
+..,*
M March 31, 1978 fEri Docket No. 50-320 I.*Uh MEMORANDUM FOR:
K. V. Seyfrit, A/D Technical Programs, ROI, IE:HQ w.e w,
9 s,j THRU:
pg E. C. McCabe, Jr., Acting Chief, ROLNS Branch, RI f4.1 56 FROM:
D. M. Sternberg, Acting Chief, RP Section No. 1, W
RO&NS Branch, RI T%
'F,i
SUBJECT:
THREEMILEISLAND2fd2)
PRESSURIZER RELIEF VALVE CONTROL SYSTEM (AITS i F1467
- .pa
[#
1.
PN-lac:I-40 dated March 30, 1978, reported a reactor trip and blow-
- h down at Three Mile Island 2.
The cause of the trip was the loss of a
?O vital bus caused by an inverter failure.
The cause of the inverter
{ie failure is under investigation by the licensee.
The blowdown, however, n
was caused by the pressurizer Electromatic relief valve opening upon a g
loss of electrical power to its control bistable.
O::
$d 2.
This relief valve does not appear to be a safet.y-related component C"
and it opens on a 1 of 1 logic-power arrangement producing a loss of 7e:
coolant condition.
e k
3.
It is requested that the adequacy of the design approach (i.e.,
'43 valve failing open on loss of control power) be reviewed on an expedited
$M basis for B&W facilities in general and Three Mile Island in particular.
un
%E W
(j; 400 Q-
~
7 Daniel M. Sternberg, Acting Chief l{j Reactor Projects Section No. I c.
dN CONTACT:
D. M. Sternberg, RI E
(488-1256) g.
E'::
$2
&n m
~
w,'
/-e EN N$d i&
..4
~
gN,
.. UNITED, STATES
- g;.
g.; -
- ( g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY C Reference 22 g
e a
~~ s31 PARK AVENUE REGION I g **
n'
. ~ '
,UP8C'OF PRUS$1A. PENNSYl.VANIA 19406
~ ~ ~.
$g 4
-H.
Docket No. 50-320 MAY 311978 5:
i E
- (..
Metropolitan Edison Company i
ATTN: Mr. J. G. Herbein F
Yice President E
P. O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19503 E;
t,..
Gentlenen:
Subject:
Inspection 50-320/78-17
=
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. D. Haverkamp of this office on May 3-5 and 8-10,1978, at the Three Mile Island Nuclear i
Station, Unit 2, Middletcwn, Pennsylvania, of activities authorized by b
NRC License 16. D?R-73 and to the discussions of our findings held by E
Mr. Haverkas:p with Mr. J. Seeli.nger of your staff at the conclusion of
[f th inspection.
R Areas exanined during this inspection are described.in the Office of i:
Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report which is enclosed with this letter.
Within these areas, the' inspection consisted of selective
- e Fik examinations of proce:'ures and representative records, interviews with F
personnel, measurer,ents cade by the inspector., and observations by the if inspector.
F, E
Within the scope of this inspection, no ' items of noncompliance were
[T,1 observed.
In acco'rdance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rul'es of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal P,egulations, a copy of this letter and the p=
enclosed insp2ction report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document
=..
Room.
If this report contains any informiation that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure.'- Any such application must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the infomation, which identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a statement of reasons which addresses with specificity the item.s which will be
=
considered by the Comaission as listed in subparagraph (b,'(4) of Section 2.790.
The infor:ation sought to be vithheld shall be incorporated as
=u far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not -
hear frca you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Publi: Document Room.
~...
O n 9 Q45 pf4 Lh i,
7,ff
~ _
a, 5: \\
=7
_.._m
..... - - = - - - - - - -
-0
V C
MAY 311978 Metropolitan Edison Coapany 2
L t
No reply to this letter is required; however, if you should have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
~
Sincerely,
n El n J. Brunner, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
Enclosure:
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report Number 50-320/78-17 cc w/ encl:
R. L. Wayne, QA Fanager, Design & Construction T. Broughton, Safety & Licensing Manager R. W. Heward, Jr., Project Manager R. C. Arnold, Vice President, Gen,eration L. L. Lavfer, lunager, Generation Operations - Nuclear G. P. Miller, Superintendent J. L Seelinger, Unit 2 Superintendent j
7 Gerald Charnoff, Esquire I. R. Finfrock, Jr.
Miss Mary V. Southard, Chainaan, Citizens for a Safe Environment (Without Report) bec w/ encl:
IE Pail a Files (For Appropriate Distribution)
Central Files Public Cocu=ent Roca (PDR)
I Local Public focumnt Room (LPOR)
Nuclear Safety Infonration Center Technical Inforcation Center (TIC)(HSIC)
PlG:I Reading Roca Region Directors (III, IV)
Commonwealth of Pennsylvan(Report Only) ia Miss Fary V.- Southard, Chainnan, Citizens for a -
Safe Environment 9
e t
7
b.S.MUCLEARFIGULATORYCOMMISSsj
~T OFFICE OF IN5pECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
.3' j
l
~;.
]., ' '
' ~ ~ ~.
R'egion I
. f h ig
~
Report No. _ 50-320/78-17 sm i ms not esm p m #u sn, g,;g,,3 Docket No. 50-320 License No. D?R-73 Priority Crtegory B-2 Licensee:
Metrocolitan Edisen Company P. O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19503 Facility Name: Three Mile Island Nuclear Statior., Unit 2 Inspection at: 'Middletown, Pennsylvania
~
Inspection conducted May 3-5:and
-10, 1978 l
Inspectors:
_ m_o v,
J'
'7[
D. R.6dverkd::$, ?.eactor frispector c' ate signed date signed i
ff date signed
[ 2f
[
Approved by:
CL/
A y
0.' N. Sternberg, Acting Chi %f, Reacter d4te signed Projects Section No.1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Sumary:
Insoection on May 3-5 and 3-10,1978 (Recort No. 50-220/78-17)
Areas Insoected:
Routine, una nounced inspection of clant operations including snift logs and records and facility tour; licensee followup actions concerning selected licensee events, IE Circulars, and previous inspection findings; reactor coolant system deconta:aination; emergen~ y safeguards actuatlen on April 23, 1978; c
unit auxiliary.transfonter design deficiency; and postusited small break LOCA.
The inspection cocaenced during a backshift and involved 42.5 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Resul ts:
No itec.s of nonexpliance were identified.
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT f-t/v l b O$
Entire document previously entered into 7ystem under:
hb 74 "l3 h kh 2' ANO l BOO.
/h 7g,
No. ef pages:
7 i:
i um. e
- OGC
Q
~(
~
DETAILS l.
Persons Contacted
?
Metrocolitan Edison Cocoany Mr. C. Adams, Shift Foreman Mr. M. Seers, Shift Supervisor Mr. R. Benzel, Unit 2 Lead Electrical Engineer
- Pr. M. Bezilla, PORC Secretary Fr. J. Brwoer, Unit 2 Lead Instrumentation and Controls Engineer Mr. W. Conaway, Shift Foreman Fr. R. Dubiel, Supervisor of Radiation Protection and Chemistry
- Fr. J. Floyd, Supervisor of Operations L
Pr. C. Guthrie, Shift Foreman Mr. J. Hilbish, Station Lead Huclear Engineer Fr. K. Hoyt. Shift Foreman i
Mr. R. Hutchinson, Shift Forecan
~
Mr. P. Lydon, Shif t Foreman Fr. B. Marshall, Operations Engineer Mr. G. Miller, Station Superir.tendent Mr. T. Mulleavy. Radiation Protection Supervisor
- Fr. J. Sealinger, Unit 2 Superintendent - Technical Support' General Public Utilities f
Mr. C. Gatto, Lead Mechanical Engineer Mr. R. Toole, Test Superintendent The inspector also talked with ar.d interviewed several other licen-see egloyees during the inspection.
iney included reactor operators and enginesrir.g and office personnel.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensse Action on Previous Insoection Findinos (Closed) Nancospliance 320/78-09-02:
Audible Count Rate.
The licensse's corrective reasures have been completed as described in MEC letter to NRC Region I serial GQL 0458, dated March 2/,1978.
Procedure 251-4.01, " Core Assecbly", was revised by PCR 2-78-491,
[
which added a prersquisite to ensure a specific operator inside containment is responsible for continuously monitoring audible count rate.
I
~
E N
a-
-'*'0"Y
?',,,'A-E
~ ~ ~ ~
(
(
~
,.ag 3
ll
=.
5 (Closed) Noncompliance 320/78-10-01:
Drawing.ind Drawing Change
((
Control. The licensee's corrective measures aave been completed or is initiated as described in MEC letter to NRC degion I serial GQL i=
0707, dated April 18, 1978.. The comprehensive review and audit of ih Unit 2 drawings is being tracked by PORC Action Item (PAI) 2-78-15.
is E
(Closed) U$ resolved Item 320N8-10-02: Revision of Surveillance F
Procedure 2311-F4.
Revision I.to SP 2311-F4 was issued March 21, 1978, which incorporated values of moderator temperature coefficient it consistent with Technical Specification LCO values.
E q.
(Closed) Noncompliance 320/78-10-06: Torque: Wrench and Torque E
Wrench Tester Calibration.
The licensee's corrective measures have E
been coc:pleted as described in MEC letter to NRC Region I serial F
GQL 0707, dated April 18, 1976.
Revision l to PM Procedure M-48 E
was issued April 6,1978, which incorporates criteria for detennining F
that calibration of torque wrenches and torque wrench testers will i
be satisfactorily accomplished. Additionally, a QA evaluation was
~
completed, as described in NRC Region I letter to MEC, dated May 1, i'
1978.
The evaluation of torque wrench tested data and troque wrench data indicated that the out of tolerance condition of the -
i equipment related only to its use for left hand threaded fasteners.
F Since there are no such fasteners used at the facility, no further action was necessary.
F 3.
Review of Plant Ooerations g
a.
Shift Loos and Coeratina Records I
The inspector raviewed the following logs and records:
k, Shift [oreran Log, Control Roca Log Book, Control Room
[.
Operator's L.og Sheets, Primary Auxiliary Operator's Log-P.
. Tour Readings, Primary Auxiliary Operator's Log-Liquid i.
'daste Disposal Panels, Secondary Auxiliary Operator's Log i,
Sheets, and Auxiliary Operator Log' Sheets-Out-Building i'
Tour; dated February 8
' April 30,1978.
=
Shift and Daily Checks;. dated February 8 - April 30, 5
1 978.
=-
Jumper, Lifted Lead, and-Mechanical Modifications Log '
)
(active and cleared); entries c:ade during February 8 -
!E May, 5,1978.-
j --
EE L
k'I.
_;_7-;-
.-= m x_
-- _. - = = = = - -
~
.{
{
= = -
'7..
= ~~
[f.'
Equipment Lockout Tag tog (active and cleared); entries t.*
cade during February 8 - May 5,1978.
Er p...
Do Not Operate Tag Log; entries made during February 8 -
kr May 5, 1978.
Er
!=
Transient Cycle 1.og Book; entries made during February
!=
8 - May 5, 1978..
E+
- =
Unit 2 Superintendent's Operating Memos Nos.1 through 4.
b j
i I
Unit 2 Standing Order No.1, dated March 23, 1976.
4 F[i[
Unit 2 Operations Department Memo's 2-78-1 through 2-78-8.
E Tne logs and records were reviewed to verify the.following
[
i tems.
Ifi 1.og keeping practices and log book reviews are conducted f
in accordance with established administrative controls.
Log entries involving abnormal conditions are sufficiently detailed.
[..
Operating orders do not conflict with Technical Specifications
(.TS sl.
5 Jumper log and tagging log entries do not conflict with i
TSs.
Jumper / lifted lead / mechanical modification and tagging operations are conducted in conformance with established adninistrative controls, p
Problem identification reports confirm compliance with TS F
reporting and LCO requirements.
Acceptance criteria for the above review included inspector judgecent and requirements of applicable Technical Specifica-i tions and the following procedures.
E Station Administrative procedrue (SAP) 1002, " Rules for the protection of Employees Working on Electrical and E
Mechanigal Apparatus," Revision 12.
L E-E h
I.I
+\\
_..=. 1 m
s-
~ - - - - - --
(
5 1
i:
l SAP 'l010. " Technical Specification Surveillance Program,"
Revision 12, TCN 2-78-328.
SAP 1011. " Controlled Key Locker Control," Revision 15.
SAP 1012, " Shift Relief and Log $ntries," Revision 8.
SAP 1013, "3ypass of Safety Functions and Jumper Control,"
Revision 7.
SAP 1016, " Operations Surveillance Program," Revision 12.
~
SAP 1033, " Operating Memos and Standing Orders," Original.
SAP.1037, " Control of Caution Tags,'" Origir.al.
The inspector's findings regarding shift logs and operating records were acceptable, except as noted below.
Shift Foreman L.og and Control Room Log. Book entries were l
explicit and compiete.
Scae minor discrepancies were r.oted regarding the administration of controls for lifted leads and jumpers, including e
manner of log sheet completion and accountability of active, in ctive and missing tags.
These items were discussed dth 1icensee representatives and corrected or scheduled for correction prior to completion of the inspection.
The inspector determined that active lifted leads and jumpers were properly installed and had no further questions concerning this item.
The Transient Cycle Log Book did not include entries for all recent heatups, cooldowns, reactor trips and safety inf ections.
Licensee representatives stated that the log book would be reviewed and entries would be included for appropriate transients.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
~
SAP 1037, issued Parch 13, 1978, implements use of yellow cardboard type CAUTION tags as an information tag only.
The tag is to be attached to a component, control switch or other ifevice to indicate an off normal condition or to caution personnel to a specific condition which murt
- l. '
s f
l
C.
Q J...
.-j 6
be satisfied pr.ior to using the component or device.
Additionally, SAP 1037 provides for use of a red bakelite D0-NOT-0PEPATE tag in place of a CAUTION tag, particularly when used in environments where the' CAUTION tags may easily deteriorate under extended use.
The administrative controls provided by SAP 1037 have not yet been fully implemented, includi.ng operator training regarding use of CAUTION tags and replacement of existing white informa-tion stickers and DO-NOT-OPERATE tags with CAUTION tags where applicable. Licensee representatives stated that the full implementation of SAP 1037 would be expedited.
This item is unresolved (320/78-17-01) pending licensee icplementation of SAP 1037.
E i
b.
Plant Tour Upen arrival at the site at 8:30 p.:::. on May 3,1978, the inspector proceeded directly to the Control Room to observe plant operations during off normal hours.
Control Room manning and Cortrol Board monitori.ng instru entation and equipment controls were observed for conforraance with applicable Technical
~
Specification requirements. The inspector then. conducted a tour of the Unit 2 Reactor Building to observe activities in prcgress, radiation controls established at the personnel y
access control point, general cleanliness conditions and potential fire hazards. The tour was completed at 10:15 p.n.
At various t mes during May 4-5 and 8-10,1978, the inspector conducted tours of the following accessible plant areas.
Auxiliary Building l
Turbine Building l
Fuel Handling Building j
Control Room Switchgdar Rooms Inverter and Battery Rooms l
Diesel Rdoms Make-up Pump Rooms Building Spray Pump and Decay Heat Pump Vaults i;,
r
[
t.
t'.
. -. =.
.:s
_ _ -__ - - - - - d -
D
(.
7 The following observations /discu'ssions/detenninations were made.
Controi Room and. local monitoring instrumentation. for various ccaponents and parameters was observed, including reactor coolant flow, pressure and temperature, pressurizer pressure and temperature, and control rod positions.
Radiation controls established by the iicensee, including the posting of radiation areas, the condition of step-off pads and the disposal of protective clothing, were observed.
Radiation work permits used for entry. to radiation and
~ controlled areas were reviewed.
Actual radiation level measurements were taken and compared with posted values throughout the plant.
Plant housekeeping, including general cleanliness conditions and storace of materials and ccmponents to prevent safety and fire hazards, were observed.
Systecs and equipment in all areas toured were observed for the existence of fluid leaks and abnonnal piping vibrations.
\\
Selected DHR, BS, MS, and PA system piping snubbers /
restraints were observed for proper fluid level and condition / proper hanger settings.
The indicated positions of electrical power supply breakers
{
and selected P3S, PSEC?., NSRP, DHR, DH, and DHCC control board equipment start swi.tches and remote-operated valves and the actual positions of DH, BS, DF, CO, and MU manual-operated valves were observed.
Selected e:uipaent lockout tags were observed for proper posting and tagged equipment was observed, for proper positioning.
i'he items observed included tags and equip-
~
Inent associated with clearances 2095, 2226 and 2360.
Selected jumper and lifted lead markers were observed for proper identification and the effected wiring changes were observed for proper completion.
The items observed included bontrols a,ssociated with the lifted leads 8 and i
9 and jumpers 4 and 5.
op t
i 4
L..
m 9
---.v-------.-__e
%w
,.,em,-~.g
C
~
(
8 The Control Board was observed for annunciators that "norrrally should no; be lighted during the existing plant conditions.
The reasons for the annunciators were discussed with c5ntrol room operators.
The licensee's poligy and practice regarding plant tours was reviewed.
~
Centrol Room manning was observed on several occasions duri.ng the inspection.
Acceptance critaria for the above items:inc1uded inspector
~
judgecient and requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(k), Regulatory C"Jide 1.114, applicable Technical Specifications and the following procedures.
SAP 1002, " Rules for the Protection of Employees Working on Electrical and P.echanical Apparatus," Revision 12.
SA? 1003, ' Radiation Pmtection Manual," Revision 12.
SAP 1008, ' Good Housekeeping," Revision 3.
l SA? 1009, ' Station Organization an'd Chain of Command,"
f Revision 3.
l SA? 1013, ' Bypass of Safety Functions and Jumper Control,"
Revision 7.
SAP 1028, ' Operator at the Controls," Original.
SA? 1037, ' Control of Caution Tags," Original.
Tne inspector's findi.ngs regarding the plant tours were acceptable.
4.
In-Office Review of Licensee Event Renorts (LERs)
The LERs listed belox were reviewed in Region I. office promptly following receipt to verify that details of the event were clearly reported including the accuracy of the description of cause and the adegracy of corrective action.
The LERs were also reviewed to determine whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were involved, whether the event should be classified as an Abnorcal Occurrence, and whether the event warranted onsite followup.
wreo
- e-
~
~
g'tTL C'C 5x itr t% W
C C
4 f..
9 r
[
.i' The folicwing LERs were reviewed.
i.
~
LER 78-01/3L, dated February 28, 1978; Reactor Building purge supply fans and associated darrgers were inoperable due to in-g complete construction.
E LER 78-02/3L, dated Febru'ary 28, 1978; Manufacturer's defect
~
noted in plate !6 of seismic instrucentation triaxial spectrum recorder i714.
i
- - - LER 78-03/IT, dated February 27, 1978; Fire watch not stationed F
during cable room Halon system inoperabi.lity.
i j
- -- LER 78-04/IT, dated February 27, 1978, Source range neutron l
instur:rentation audible counts not in service during fuel
=
load.
- -- LER 78-05/9?T, dated February 21, 1978; Rock rip-rap moved down slepe of dike due to icproper slope.
^
- - - LER 78-C6/IT, dated March 2,1978; Direct conmunications not established between Reactor Buildi.ng and Control Room during incere detector installation.
LER 78-07/3L, dated March 16, 1978; durin the reverse powar relay actuated causing' g surveillance testing
~
l X-IB to trip.
~
Diesel Generator DF-l
- -- LER 78-08/3L, dated March 25, 1978; three fire penetration seals ware r.ot functional.
- -- LER 78-G9/3L, ' dated March 25, 1978; during pre-op test of CRD
~
mechanisms the CRD trip breakers were closed and control rods withdrawn prior to performing function test of T.S. 4.3.1.1.1.
LER 78-10/.3L, dated April 4,1978; river water pump outlet and prelube valves and redundant RCP seal injection valves were not functior.a.lly tested prior to placing their respective
~
systec.s in service.
O N
N A
e r
i L
_y
""~
. C C
10 LER 78-ll/3L, dated April' 7, 'i978; Reactor Building door seals
~
surveillance was not perforced within previous 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> prior to entering Mode 4.
- -- LE?. 78-13/It, dated '$ arch ~27,1978;. "A" Diesel Ginerator was not deconstrated operable by perforcing required surveillance, when "B" Diesel Generator was tagged out of service.
~
LEP. 78-14/3L, dated April 12, 1978; inrier door seals on both
~
airlocks failed the surveillerce test due to insufficient seating on the inner doors.
- -- LER 78-15/IT, dated March 27, 1978; remedial action required
.on the "B" Steam Generator special vibration instrumentation inspection opening assembly to prevent the developement of an unsafe condition.
LER 78-16/IT, dated' April 5,1978; Nuc1 ear Service Water Pumps
~
lA and 18 inoperable due to failure of load shed relays to reset.
LER 78-17/3L, dated ' April 21, 1978; weld leak at 1/2 inch inlet nipple socket weld joint to DR-V1218 at Decay Heat Pump 13 suction piping.
f l
LER 78-19/IT, dated April 5,1978; power shaping rod position out of specification in Mode 2.
LIR 78-20/3L, dated Aoril 21, 1978; containment isolation valves NM-V52 and.NS-V81 inoperable due to engagement of manual handwheel pins.
LER 78-21/3L, dated May 1, l'978; Vital Bus 2-iy became de-energized duri.ng ES test due to fuse blown on bus power supply transfer.
LER 78-23/3L, dated April 24,.1978; only one boron injection
~
flow path verified operable prior to entry into Mode 4.
The above LERs were closed, based on satisfactory review in the Region I office, except those LE?a selected for onsite followup.
+
5'-
I
{
\\
i i-e-
h_
A--
--a:'Q gg-
---~------ ---
d
,j
(
C EL E... -
==.
11 E
E" T
r E
5.
Onsite Licer,see Event Follo'wuo
{..
For those LERs selected for onsite followp (denoted in Paragraph h
4), the inspector verified that the r.eporting requirements of E
Technical Specificatiions and GP 4703 (Original) had..been met, that appropriate corrective action had been.taken, that the event was reviewed by the' licensee as required by Technical Specifications, l:
and that continued operation of the facility was conducted in con-fortcance with Technical Specification li::iits.
bi!
The insp2ctor's findings regarding these licensee events were r
acceptable, unless othergise noted below.
F:
u Corrective ceasures associated with LERs 78-10/_3L and 78-23/3L F
are being tracked for completion by PORC Action Items 2-78-007 and 2-78-017, respectively. The inspector deternined that the licensee's planned corrective actions were appropriate and had E.
no further questions on these LERs.
Corrective ceasures associated with LERs 78-09/3L, 78-12/3L, I
78-13/IT, 78-16/IT and 78-19/IT are being tracked for completion L
by PORC Action Items 2-78-005, 2-78-016, 2-78-014, 2-78-009 and 2-78-010, respectively. The inspector determined that the licensee's planned corrective actions were appropriate and
[
substantially completed.
Mcwever, the originally scheduled
[j dates for completing the PORC Action Items were overdue.
i Licensee representatives stated that appropriate reviews of F
outstanding PORC Action Iteas would be p rformed to ensure p.
that corrective measures are properly completed as scheduled or that extanded completion due dates are approved when necessary on an ad hoc basis.
Licensee measures to ensure timely completion F
of PORC Action Items in general and resolution of the specific itens listed above will be reviewed during a subsequent. inspection.
(320/78-17-02) 6.
IE Circular Follcwuo The inspector reviewed the licensee's followup actions regarding h'
the IE Circulars listed below.
~
IEC 77-14,. " Separation of Contaminated Water Systems from s
Noncontaminated Plant Systecs."
E
=
IEC 77-16, 'Ecergency Diesel Generator Electrical Trip Lock-E l out Features."
E 1 h#
m
-(
{
12 IEC 78-02, '" Proper Lubrica' ting Oil for' Terry Tu'rbines."
The review included discussions with licensee personnel and review of selected facility records.
The licensee's followup actions were rev.iew'ed 'to verify. that the circulars were received by appropriate licensee management, a review for applicability was performed, and that action taken or planned is appropriate. Acceptance criteria for the above review included inspector judgement and requirements of applicable Technical Specifications and facility procedures.
The licensee has initiated, but not completed', PORC Action Items 2-78-022, 2-78-023 and 2-78-020 to require reviews of IE Circulars 77-la, 77-16 and 78-02, respectively, to determine facility applicability and appr:priate folicwup actions.
Licensee resolution of the above PORC Action Items will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(320/78-17-03) 7.
Reactor Coolant System Decontamination Several facilities have recently carried out or are planning to '
carry cut decontamination of reactor coolant pressure boundary comp:nents without prior-.NRC approval.
This is allowed under.the
- p provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.
Operations of this nature generally do no.t represent unreviewed safety questions provided that the following conditior.s are satisfied.
The components involved have been physically removed from the system.
The licensee's administrative controls and post-decontamination surYeillar.Ce are adequate to assure that residual decontamination solution is not introduced into other components within the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
The component is not degraded.
The inspector infarbed licensee representatives that NRR is actively developir.g generic criteria to govern decontimination of reactor coolant pressure bour.dary components.
Until' these generic criteria are deYeloped, decoptamination solutions with unproven corrosion characteristics should not be introduced into components within the reactor coolant pressure boundaries of operating reactors without prior NRC approval.
a e
aerm e e e
m.ma...
b k._
13 f
been.in'spector determined that chemical decontamination h'as neither 5h ihe carried out on.cocponents within the reactor coolant pressure
=
boundary nor is planned in the near future by the li.censee.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this matter.
8.
Emercency. Safeguards Actuation
- ._E The inspector' reviewed the licensee's corrective measures concerning h
the energency safeguards (ES) actuation which occurred on April 23, 1978.
Details of the occurrence, including the event description,-
the cause, and the related consequences, were reported in MEC
~
12.
letter to Region I serial GQL 0871, dated May 8,.1978,.which enclosed LERs 78-33/IT and 78-31/IT.
Subsequent to the occurrence, an in-hs depth investigation w actual event and app as initiated by the licensee to evaluate the b
ropriate corrective action.
The inspector reviewed the finalized site report of the incident, forwarded by JLS temor'andum to GPM, dated May 4,1978. The report included sections which described the synopsis of the event, the sequence of events, conclusions and recoanendation/ action items, as well as Various pertinent appendices.
The inspector noted that the licensee's investigation was thcrough and addressed all significant aspects of the incident.
The inspector also reviewed B&W letters to MEC serial SOM-II-140, dated May 2,1978, and serial SOM-II-143, dated May 5,1978.
These letters provided evaluations of specific areas of concern following i
the transient, based on a preliminary B&h' review of the effects of p
the supplied data, which supported continued facility startup and operation.
The specific evaluations, included findings, transient results and reconnendations, concerning the reactor coolant pumps, the control rod drive mechanisms, fuel ccaponents, RCS water chemistry, i
the ence through steam generators,. the reactor vessel, the reactor
/
coclant pipin'g and pressurizer usage factors, and voiding of the
. /'
pressurizer. The licensee will submit a special report of the ES actuation and injection pursuant to T.S. 3.5.2.b.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this incident.
The licensee's final ' disposition of recorcended corrective and the ES actuation / injection report actions will be reviewed during a r
subsequent routine inspection.
[
j';
.*J.
e em.
4
%e
(
s p3 E=r 4
14 r
=
h
~
ir E
\\
9.
Unit Auxiliary Transfonner Design Deficiency j"
On May 3,1978, Region I was notified by a licensee representative b
i that the unit auxiliary transfonners did not meet the requirements 1
of General Design Criteria 17 of 10 CFR 50.
Each of the two unit 2
auxiliary transfon:ers was determined to be incapable of carrying E
the unit full load auxiliaries and the engineered safety feature 7
auxiliaries, for the normal ' operating range of the 230 KV grid, during periods of peak unit auxiliary demand.
Additional details
=
of this occurrence were reported by MEC to Region I in a telegram, dated May 4,1978, and in a written followup report, dated May 9, 1 978.
E it The followup report described the following' corrective actions,'
[.;
which would be taken to assure adequate voltage levels to support ih operation of the ESF and balance of plant auxiliaries:
p The unit will not be operated above a (bus loadir.9) power level compatible to safe single transformer operation; i.
Selective balance of plant load shedding will be installed; or
}
The autonatic bus' transfers to the other auxiliary transfonners i-for designated buses will be disabled.
On May 10,1978, licensee ' representatives informed the inspector I
{
that, for the nonnal 232-238 XV grid voltage operating range, each i
unit auxiliary transfonner would meet the requirements of GOC 17 E
1 provided that the total 4170/6900 V bus load was restricted to 48 MW and that each 4160 V bus load was restricted to 20 MW.
Appropriate i
adninistrative controls will be implemented to ensure that the unit i
is operated within these maximum bus loading values.
Additionally, pending further review by the licensee, the fast transfer of balance of plant loads may be defeated, if necessary.
For long term corrective i
actions, the licensee is considering to selectively block the fast transfer of individual balance of plant components including two F
circulation water pumps, one condensate booster pump and one heater 1
drain pump. The inspector subsequently informed the flRR project
!= a manager for the facility of these planned corrective actions.
The bI inspector had no -further questions concerning this matter. The
[
licensee's final resolution of planned corrective measures will be fJ reviewed during a subsequent routine inspection.
E
~
Q
.. I h'
Ex.
)
=.:.
1 E5 i 1
E )
_-- 1
(
k._
l
?T 15 1
e w )
10.
Pos'tulated Small ' Break (OCA i
HEC letter to NRC:NPa serial GQL 0354, dated May 5,1978, enclosed the results of B&W's most recent calculations concerning a small break LOCA at TMI, as.well as the analysis presented to the NRC E
staff by B&W at a meeting on April 25, 1978. Additionally, the.
~=.
letter described certain actions that have been taken or that were planned to ensure proper. operator responsa to a small break LOCA.
The inspector verified that the folicwing actions have been satis-
~
factorily completed by the licensee.
Emergency Procedure.-
E 2202-1.3 was revised to. detail the operator response as described in MEC letter serial C9L 0854.
i=
Operating Procedure 2104-1.2 was revised to permit operations E
with one of'the make-up pump discharge cross-connect valves
~
open and the other one closed.
F Each shift was briefed on the contraints of the license and
~
the small break LOCA procedure requirernents, and each operator
~
. has physically located all equipment required to be operated p
in accordance with the procedure changes.
Unit 2 Operations Department Meco 2-78-10 was written to require each operator to sicnify understanding of the procedure changes and specific LOCA response canning requirements designated therein.
Ops Mero 2-78-10 required a sheet to be attached to the Control Rooa Log sheet showing the two individuals assigned the responsi-bilities for carrying out the actions indicated in the procedure F
changes.
Ops Hero 2-78-10 required each shift to be rebriefed at least once per month of the actions required in the procedures.
~
h.
Each shift has perfonned drills to verify that the assumed i
operator response time is achievable and within the analysis assumptions.
The inspector discussed the LOCA response actions with selected I
operators and verif,ied their understanding and knowledge of the procedure changes. ' Additionally, the inspector observed that the i
HPI discharge ve' *es and cross-connect. valves were properly aligned and instructions posted for normal and LOCA operation, that the valves. were accessible for procpt operation in the event of a LOCA, i
and that dedicated ccar.unications headsets were provided at the HPI F
discharge valve areas:
e n -
\\_
.k. ;
b 16
~
E 5:.
r Tne inspector reviewed the licansee's plans to submit 8&'d results of additional calculations for power levels up to 2772 Kd(t) and
=
to submit a Technical Specification Change Request covering the above procedures.
Licensee representatives stated that the LOCA precedures T.S. Change Request would be submitted to NRR by June 15, 1978, in conjunction with the BiW reanalysis submittal.
The inspector hed no further questions concerning this mai.ter.
Find-ings were acceptable.
- 11. Unresolved Items Unresolved itens are matters for which core:information or additional b
tire is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable, F-itens of nonconoliance or deviations.
An unresolved item identified i:
during this inspection is discussed in Paragraph 3.a.
l 12.
Exit Interview i
The inspector met with lice.a.see representatives (denoted in Paragraph
- 1) on luy 10,1978, to discuss the findings of the inspection.
=
.h e
I:
r px L:.
madeeeeo emesa
conico stocm 1 I
I,'
I I
i
-o@
l (Pr Reference 23 b IPlAlTl'il1l2!@!Oiv, I-l0 10 IO IO 10 r
8 9 GCEr.2E& CO3g 14 15 LscEME h sufsa 3.vr E
,. "*g [t_)@l o i s 101010131210 )@lo i 31219171 si@lo I5 to I il 71 al@
- 5 8
W 41 DQ:n:E T NUM3 ER 63 63 EVENT DATg 74
'75 EVENT DEscalPDON AND PRoaASLE CoNsEoUaNCEs h REPORT DATE SQ E luhile in IOde 2, Vital Bus 2-lV became de-energized, thus' reouirino ooeration in th+
3 { Action Statement for T.S. 3.8.2.1, 3.3.2.1 (Table 3.3-3 Items 3A and 3B), 3.3.3.5, 3 tand 3.3.3.6.
This event produced no adverse safety concerns, because the reactor 3 gtripped, the ECCS functioned per design, and the vital bus was re-energized within p (the time frame of the applicable Action Statements returning affected equipment to
- 21 [ operable status.
TTl I
~
4 S
$YSTEM CAUS!
CAUSE CODE CC35
$USCODE CO30siiNT Cou!
SudC002
$USC00E COMP.
vat.vt lE IB [@.O@ W @ [ I l li l S I T l R l U l@ l C l@ y @
191 8
9 10 18 12 13 12 59 20 Ou tNTI AL CCCUARENCE REPORT REVISiO4 '
EVE vT YE AR
@ g,g y, 4j.7,g
[287l8[
[_.l l 0] 2ll]
y.
(0 (3 [
l Ll g.
No.
REPORT NO.
COOE TYPE g
t 22 23 23 23 29 30 3l 32 i'
r3 OP T
1 8
SUPPL Lt FA TL i
!X E@l_C_}@
L.Z_j@
LZj@
l01o1oIo1 LLi@
LttJ@
LAj@
lSl?IsI
- 2 x
as 35 Ji 4a u
cAuss DEsenirnon ANDcosas nys ACTicNs @
9'.
.c u
ic i [The Vital Bus Inverter failed to function procerly in the free runnino mode. when E [ Alternate (AC) Source was trioped during SFAS testina resultino in a hinwn f..o g lthe DC ir. pet.
The Alternate Source (AC) Breaker was closed. eneroizino the g land the falty inverter control module and fuse were reolaced.
I. D 1 8 e N.f3
~
5
% Pott!R OTH3 R STATUS OS O RY DJlBl@ l0l0lOl@l DISCOVERY DESCRIPTic.y liA l
[B_J@l SFAS surveillance testinc
' AIT,ve ry CSrEnf GJ [Z l@ WQ]
A.mxTo= A:Tiv Tv h l toCATion or artsAss @
nututo cnst'EAsr liA l
MA t
8 9 13 11 44 45 P!MONNit !KPOSuat$
r;u e In TYPE Discan*T:0N 3'3 O 10 t o 10 l@iz_J@l NA
+
3 $,t.me,.m'<cuuh oma,m;@
w:w, S 10lo1018!
HA t 9 18 12 LL'.:. C : C 8t (tt..* ACE TO FACILITY C 0b T re c L E:4 *t.3 T 3 s l'h
$ $)Y ( AY) f0ZS g g..p,M.':s ty r '.
in e r.c:.urm --
fiftC (CE Oi4LY L'echly (;cus P.elease 1
1 I I i I I I I Ll I i g.,
33 4,
OS d
A' ttn9el 215-929-3501 Ext.1c3 f:r.*.:P OT PP.EPAnitt -
FilON U;
Q
%i' ~a:
umso srrres V.
o NUCL_AR - REGUI.ATORY C E
Reference 24 y s.x"g C jy5 asciou s sai raax avenus p,
., U 3-,.(f.. Q
,und oy enussu nunsvt.vx g, vg --
ms E
Docket No. S0-320 0 3 CCT 1978 Metropolitan Edisen Ccraparc ATTH:
Mr. J. G. Eertein Vice President - Generation P. O. Bcx 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Gentleinen:
Subject:
Irspec-; ion 50-320/78-24 This refers to your letter dated September 18, 1978, in response to our i
letter dated August 24, 1978.
Tnank you for infor.::ing us of the corrective and preventive actions.
Tnese acticr.s will be examined during a subsequent inspection of your licensed prcgrec.
Based on a telephone dis:ussion between Mr. D. Haverkamp of this office and Mr. '4. Fotts of your staff, on Septecher 27, 1978, it ic our under-standing that tha potential or actual use of weld rod at out-of-specifi-cation temperat:.Ta c:nditions prior to July 20, 1978, will be reviewed and evaluated.
r Your cocperation wit'a us is appreciated.
Sincerely, f.
4
~
Sc ce H. Grier Director C.
T. 3rcushton, Safety and Licensing Manager J. J. Barton, Project Manager R. C. Arnold, Vi:e President - Generation L. L. Lrsyer,.'42 nager - Generation Operations - Nuclear G. P. iiller, Sqerintand.ent J. L. Seelinger, Unit 2. Superintendent - Technical Support I. R. Finfreck, Jr.
Mr. R. Conrad G. F. Tr:wbridge, Esc,uire Miss Mar / V. Scuthard, Chairman, Citizens for a Safe Environment g..
NMl-
) N l-Sun
(
(
\\
tietropolitan Edison 2
0 3 GCT 1978
=
Company
- j.
bec:
IE.M. ail & Files (For.5.ppropriate Distri~cution)
Central Fi1es Public Occtment Roca (PCR)
F Local Public Docu: rent Reca (LPDR).
fluclear Safety Inforsatica Centar (tiSIC)
~
Tecimical Infor.atien Canter (TIC)
REG:I Reading Rcom Commnwaalth of Pen:tsylvania l
\\
e I
=
m 9
1 M.a wi.d:
'-MMO. L J
["XLL~.': J':1
'.L'L'.'.Li~~~.~~.T~C' "'"'
' ~'-
" ' ~ ' ' ~
1
(
-.y g-l1
- .U!"as y
Eas.ary N J'M,848CE'ad/31 METROPOUTAN EDlSON COMPANY :ves:cwrrcrcenEnuveucununescowanncn i
=
Sec. z.e::er,&8,19 a G.5 153 2 M:. 3. E. G-ie:, E"ree:c O'fice of : spec.1 = & I:'= --t Regica 1 U. S. 5celes: Heg12.a cry C=
ssi:=
631 Park Avette E
5"# a :- o f ?-.:ss '_a, ? -=.-1T-
' a '19E06
,_4.=
~.
Dea.
C
,., u,,. - - -c
.a _.._.,.._e*4._s_ Lr _4* 2 (<_.r _2)
C;erstic.g lice.se Io. DPR-73
^
.._. o
,ccr.e:
x ;e I spe:.i Rep:-
5:. TS-2h
- r. _. _as,._ _
e_,.
s, _.
_s,
,~..
st.o,,_.._.
_,_._s,,
,&4
- _ pc,._
. s'm,, 4.
A..,
_.. ~,.
3.
Sh. EaTe-W- 's inspr.:1:: : July S_2. s:d J217 31_Atr..st 3,1978, and the f'a
- s the eof.
3el:v is.ie respense. the 12'ractic: referenced in.the sub*ect ins;ecti::.
r.
~
e
.,,. a 10 CF2 50,177 ,- 3, Crit eria 7, stat es in pa:-t :
" Activities agiscri:.g ;-e-'
7 s' < ' he.- ese:ih ei h7... procedures and shA 1 he ace:--C. ed i= s.:co '* ce,rith thes e... rocedures...". The acce;;ei terst':-+' Q:C. '.t7 As s-'-a -' ' = ?r:g-*2. (?SAE Section '.I 1 3 1) sta es, in pa: ::
"~2e Fe:-Ei CT*' 't?
- sa.rance ?ls:
contains the
_...J_w.
".a.
= _A. J F. J. s a.* #a.,,.._. J.
.d _J h.;
1_ e w,_%C
.:. ed
(,,,
A ws _
--.a we g..
4 3_._
___,.._,2.__-a.g...'T.
a..
., y 2
- J.a.y 3_e i_')
3 y ee. 4 #_4. g
.f.,, *_.3 3.. *- ~_e_-.4__
._.,, c.A...,
.'..3_2 J_,
J 4 a
4
_A u
..a--g, __.~
_s _. g..
- s., gya1, swe 2.,se a <-
- u....-..:_._..-_ u
_,a.
z n
y C
he* d'--/st: z.re :Te:s a:i - tained at 250~? 1 25 ?.
Cc:trs:7 t: the s':cre, : July 20,197c, the holding /sterage far: ace cc:ts' ' g the icv *:7=r: gen veli reds vas fou:d to be at an indicated te=;ers._ e cf 190C?.
r Co m iv= icti: s 1EE-Since the *:a :' r/s c -age cret...s deter-# ed to be deficient, it vas j
e---.
<-"~e veld red involve'l A
. _ 7
..r m 2 _.
___..4..
_..m.
. as
. a _ _ n. _ -as_:./stc:*-e,e even an,i returned to the hake ove:
t,.
.,._..__,.,2=a_a--,,
,a p-pe v
[
f d'
' Pr
- 1
.L t
Mr. 3. H. Grier, Directe-September 18,1978
[E GQL 1932 lE tr..
t....'.
Cer--etir= Stars Cden to o eve =t a-r p.c=- e Recu-- eece
- 1. 7.
The regi: ene. cts of IC? 2-2 vere ree r~-"i=ed to the responsible constructic: perse::el. A theretsh @ *"t7 Assu ance reviev of velding Ei-control vas ccciucted o er the eried f := July 20, 1978 through July E?
31,1973 vith ::== es vei proble=s identified. Periodic QC inspections
=
of rod ove=s have bee: =c d. ted to da-;e W.th no recurrence of otc-of-specificati = tCers :ce cc ditions.
l5--
- =..
Si=ce ely,
[-
=
I.E..
v J. G. Eerbe'"
Tice ? esiden -:-eneration JGE:J2S::jg gy i;-
i l
o.
a i
t C";
^. '
==:
.+
Z.
1; u.
c" %
(
e UNITED STATES
(
da NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON f I d1 f REGION I O i;.h C31 PAMK AVENUE tt
[~
KING' OF PRUSSIA. PENNSYLVANIA 19408
. i
~
E 4 AUG 1978
~ '
~
Dockat No. 50-320 Metropolitzu Edison Company ATTH:
Mr.
C. Herbein Vice President - Generation P. 0. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection 50-320/78-24 This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. D. Haverkamp of 'this office on July 13-21 and July 31 - August 3,1978, at your corporate office and at the Three Mile Island Kuclear Station, Unit 2, Middletown, Pennsylvania, of activities authorized by NRC License No. DPR-73 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Haverkamp with Mr. J. Seelinger and other me-bers of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
~
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the Office of Inspection and Er.forcement Inspection Report which is enclosed with this letter. Within -hese areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with E,
personnel, and observaticas by the inspector.
Eased on the results of this inspection, it appears that one of your activii.ies was not c nducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set forth in the !iotice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A.
This iten of noncocpiiance has been categorized into the levels as described in our correspcndence to you dated Dece ber 31, 1974.
This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's "bles of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 2.201 recuires ycu to sutait to this office, within twenty (20) days of your receipt of this notice, a written statement or explanation in reply includir.g:
(1) corrective steps which have been taken by you and the rest 1s achieved; (2) corrective steps'which will be taken to
~
avoid further items ef-ncncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
13!@t '/6c6 #s b
p I
t
}
' L L-Metropolitan Edison Company 2
2 4 AUG 1978 In a'ccordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part I
2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must be acccmpanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information, which identifies the document or part soucht 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 soucht to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible f
into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not hear from you in p
this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Cocurrent Room.
g Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
,.A-
=
51 don v. 3 runner, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear
- y Support Branch Enclosures :
1.
Appendix A, Notice of Violation 2.
Office of Inspe: tion and Enforcement Inspection Report Number 50-320/78-24 cc w/encis:
T. Broughtor., Safety and Licensing Manager J. J. Barton, Project Manager R. C. Arnold, Vice President - Generation L. L. Lawyer, Manager - Generation Operations - Nuclear s
G. P. Miller, Superintendent J. L. # :elinger, Unit 2 Superintendent - Technical Support I. R. F infrock, Jr.
Mr. R. Conrad G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire Miss Mary V. Southard,. Chairman, Citizens for a Safe Environment (Without Report)
Ei.-
D.
r ema.
- Y
~'..
L t
. Metropolitan Edison Ccr:pany 3
i g 4g g bec w/encIs:
IE Mail & Files (For Appropriate Distribution)
~
Central Files Public Cor m.t Rcos (PCR) local Public P.,c-mnt Roc = (LPDR) fluclear Safety Information Center (IEC)
Technical Infor:ation Center (TIC)
RES:I Reading Rcea Region Directors (III, ri)(Reporti 0.'.ly)
Coercrmealth of Penr.sylvania Hiss Mary V. Scrithard, Chair.,an, Citizens for a Safe Envirormant D
e
..f
.y e
l
~
O b
l b
2 4 AUG 197a APPENDIX A 4
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Metropolitan Edison Co:apany Docket No. 50-320 Based on the results of the NRC inspection conducted on July 18-21 and July 31 - August 3,1978, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full ccmpliance with conditions of your Facility License No. DPR-73 as indicated below.
This ite:n is an Infraction.
10 CFR 50, Appendix-B, Criterion V, states, in part:
" Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by...' procedures...and shall be acccmplished in accordance with these... procedures.... " The e.
accepted Operational Quality Assurance Program (FSAR Section 17.1.S.1) states, in part:
"The Met-Ed Quality Assurance Plan...contains the requirements that activities affecting quality be documented by i nstructi on, procedures....'"
Mechanical Construction Procedure, MCP-2-2, Revision 12, specifies.
the recuirement that weld rods, if not issued, shall be placed in holdinc/storags evens and maintained at 250*F f,25*F.
Cor.trary to the above, on July 20, 1978, the holding / storage furnace
~
e cor.taining the low hydrogen vield rods was found to be at an indicated '
terperature of 190*F.
Ooge d 7D $1 76@%
e ep.s
ev---
,__p._~.
L t
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- 0. FICE OF, INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I gotCf.
g N
ppOPM
~
Report No.
50-320/78-24 OST N
D,ocket No.
50 - 320 ps OF ggs 80 OAgCE N 10 gEGtOH g gg p,cCO License No.
CPR-73 __ Priority 6
Category B2 Licensee:
Metrcpolitan Edison Company P. O. Box 542 Feading, Pennsylvania 19603 Facility Name:
Tnree Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2
)
Inspection at:
Middletcwn, Pennsylvania and Reading, Pennsylvania Inspection ccaducted: July 18-21 and July 31, August 3,1978 Inspectors:
h 2
Y
() //d,,,.w, xeat or inspector SMl$ AY 9.
- x. naverxamp date signed
- n. <r ::ano, r,eactor inspector ned n.
- k. /)
b f.aths'ig$l$
. s,,,,
- A/ %l
{;;&DZ2'E '%'"' '
Ykh"Y i.
p., ne:e icas x1, e,yactor inspector date signed 1
date signed date signed Approved by:
/#W[
g-ff. 7g~
i.
?'.
Ka'
.1, Cnief neactor Projects Section date sig'neo fNo.1, Brar r Insoectio:. St: trary:
Insoection on July 18-21 and July 31-Aucust 3,1978 (Recort No. 50-320/78-24)
Areas Instetted: Routine, unannounced insoection by regional based inspectors of train steam relief valve / piping modifications; plant operations including shift logs and records and facility tour; licensee controls for nonroutine events; licensee foilcwup actions concerning selected previous inspection findings, licensee events., and IE Sulletins and Circulars; measures established to implement Part 21 requirements; and selected licensee periodic and soecial reports. The instection involved 93 inspe hours at the corpcrate office by f,2ur NRC Results: Of the eight areas inspected, one in one area (Infractica - failure to mainta DUPLICATE DOCUMENT required teraperature - paragraph 3.c).
Entire document previously Region I Form 12 entered into system under:
i (Rev. April 77)
N MO No. of Pages:
f 5 SF x
L
(
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Metrooolitan Edison Comoanv Mr. R. Sensel, Unit 2 Lead Electrical Engineer
- /**Mr. M. Bezilia, Unit 2 PORC Secretary Mr. W. Conaway, II, Unit 2 Shift Foreman Mr. J. Chwastyk, Shift Supervisor
- Mr. v. Floyd, Unit 2 Supervisor of Operations
- Mr. J. Hilbish, Station Lead Nuclear Engineer
- Mr. T. Mackey, Jr., Supervisor of Quality Control Mr. B. Mehler, Shift Supervisor Mr. I. Portar, Unit 2 Lead Instrumentation and Controls Engineer
- Mr. J. Seelinger, Unit 2 Superintendent-Technical Support Mr. J. Stair, Licensing Engineer
- F.r.
?.. Warren, Unit 2 Lead Mechanical Engineer General Public Utilities Service Corocration Mr. J. Ecdleski, QA Engineer Mr. W. Gunn, Site Project Manager Mr. T. Hawkins, Assistant Test Superintendent
- Mr. R Toole, Test Superintendent r
- Mr. J. Wright, QA Manager
- Mr. L. Zubey, Mechanical Engineer Creuse Nuclear Er.erav Services Corocratien Mr. H. Bailey, Project Manager The inspectors also interviewed several other licensee and contractor eaplcyees during the inspection.
Iney included control room operators,
technical and engineering staff personnel and general office personnel.
- der.otes those present at the exit interview on July 21, 1978. ~
i
- dsnotas those present at 2 exit intervieu on August 3,1978.
2.
Licer.see Action on Previous Insoection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (320/76-17-11): Diesel generator "first out" failures.
Discussi6n with operations department personnel and observation mm.
~
Q b
U u
r
+.=
in the control room and diesel generator rooms indicate that the
- .T licensee has the ability to analyze the incoming diesel alarms to k
obtain "first-out" (sequence) information.
j#3 (Closed) Inspector Followup Item (320/77-17-01):
IE Bulletin 77-01 ffh followup.
The licensee has identified the time delay relays in the
==
dieseF generators with regard to information received in IE Bulletin
=
7 7-01. The relays were tested on a twice weekly basis during
==
January and February.
The timing heads for 5 and 5L relays were EE replaced and retested. The inspector had no further questions re-P garding this item.
E=.
g=::
(Closed) Inspector Follcwup Item (320/77-28-06):
Possible RCP seal
@=
design deficiency. A station blackout test 'was performed on April 22, g;
1978, and T?800/32, " Loss of Offsite Power Test," was reviewed and
- =
approved on May 19, 1978.
The procedure calls fo.r the monitoring of h:
the reactor coolant pump seals for pressure, inlet, and outlet temper-L ature. The inspector reviewed the recorder charts and found no dis-crepancies. The redesign of makeup lines to the seals and makeup
=
pump sequence appears adequate. The inspector had no further
!=
questions on this item.
l (Closed) Inspector Followup Item (320/77-29-04):
Domestic water r
system isolation.
The licensee has completed the ECM's 5512, 8088, and 8633 that tie the domes. tic water system to the Nuclear River e
pumps preluie, Service P,iver pumps prelube, and Service Water pumps prelube.
Areas that are fed by domestic water have been capped and check valves installed to prevent backflow from the prelube systems.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (320/77-40-02):
RCP leakage at
- ~
pump volute.
Procedure SP710/2, MTX 147.35, test results were
=
approvet on April 6,1978.
SP710/2, " Controlling Procedure for
~
Post Fuel Lead Precritical Testing," includes requirements for ob-servaticn of the c.ating flange of the volute and Reactor Coolant pump flange.
No leakage was observed.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
- ... j (Closed) Inspector Followup Item (320/77-41-02):
Brush recorder hi I sensitivi ty.
The sensitivity band of the brush recorders has been narrowed in TP800/36, " Shutdown From Outside the Control Room."
i=
Thus, a larger divisional increment will be obtained in the range of expected test data for Pressurizer Level, Reactor Coolant Pressure,
- 3:f and Reactor Coolant Loop Temperatures.
The inspector had no further E l questions regarding this item.
E'
?.'.':.
- =:
== l 9
=
- E.?.
..-.....T'...-
4-L L
(Closed) Unresolved Item (320/77-41-05): Modification of hanger L
support. The licensee has revised the hanger support design for
~
NSH-281-S '(Engineering Change Meco, Serial No. 5612) to eliminate interference with electrical conduits.
The inspcctor observed the modified hanger and found it in accordan'ce with the plan.
Clearance appears adequate for hot ~ operations.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (320/77-42-10): Temporary change notice (TCN) centrol.
Controls have been established to ensure removal c" cancelled TCN's from control room procedures. The inspector reviewed the TCH log and detenained that selected cancelled TCN's had been-removed from the applicable procedures.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (320/77-42-11): Equipment tagout index.
Licensee representatives stated that an index of active equipment tagouts was not currently planned.
The status of active tagouts can be determined by review of the active and cleared tagout requests and associated switching orders. The inspector determined that the licensee's centrols for tagged ecuipment were acceptable, as discussed in paragraph 4.b of this report, and had nn fu.rther questions concerning this matter.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (320/78-03-01): TP 500/4 evaluation.
The licer.see has accepted 1 cycl.e out of the 40 'or the high pressure gE injection transient, which resulted during performance of TP 600/4.
~~
The transient at 85'F injection water temperature was less severe than the analyzed transient with 50 F injection water.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (320/13-17-01):
Control of caution tags.
SAP 1037, " Control of Caution Tags," has been fully implemented.
The inspector verified that the use of CAUTION tags and D0-NOT-0PERATE tags was in confonmance with the requirements of SAP 1037.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (320/78-17-02):
Timely completion
~
of PERC action items.
Measures had been established to ensure that PORC action items are cocpleted as scheduled and to approve extended completion due dates, when necessary.
Additionally, PORC action items-2-78-005, 2-78-012, 2-78-014, 2-78-009, and 2-78-010 have been satis-factorily completed. The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
m 9
-*e--*
e e4 emWp +-
C C
ll.'l.
O h=
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item (320/78-17-03):
Resolution of PORC Action Items regarding IE Circulars.
PORC Action Items (PAI) 2 f4 023 and 2-78-020, concerning PORC review of IE Circulars 77-16 F
and 78-02, have been satisfactorily completed.
PAI 2-78-022 con-cerning IE Circular 77-14 recains outstanding.for PORC review.
L Licensee determinaticn that contaminated water systems are adequately 5
separated frca noncontaminated plant systems will be reviewed during i=
a subsequent inspection.
iE F
3.
Main Steam Relief Valve / Piping Modifications i'
a.
General flf
=
The main steam line safety relief valves were detemined to k.
have excessive blowdown characteristics, as described in
=
Licensee Event Reports 78-33 and 78-34.
Subsequent modifications L
to the safety relief valves, A through MSR6A and MSRIB
=
through MSR58, did r.ot correct the inability to obtain repro-ducible. lift pressure, reset pressure or blow-down setpoints.
=
The original valves were a prototype dual exhaust design,
- 2..
mar.ufac ured by the J. E. Lonergan Company. The twelve valves have been removsd and are being replaced with twenty, single exhaust, 6R10 Dresser Relief Valves (
Reference:
Burns and Roe Drawing SX-A151).
fr The docnentation used as the basis for acceptance criteria for the main steam valve / piping modification included:
FSAR Section 10, Steam Generator Relief Valves; TMI-2 Technical
~
Specifications; 10 CFR 50.59(a); Burns and Roe (B&R) Field Char.ge Recuest (FCR) 2520.1, Revision 2, and FCR 2520.2, Revision 2; ASME Section III, Class II,Section V and IX;
- +
ASTX; and NiSI E31.7.
The inspector rsviewed QC procedures and records with respect to caterial recsi t, storage, and handling; welding; post weld
~
?
heat treat.. ant; nondestructive examination; planned testing; and mechanical pipe arrestors.
b.
Material Receiot, Storace, and handling
~
The QC program contains appropriate procedures for materials E
checks and record retention.
These procedures include QC-2-2, F
" Receiving Inspection," Revision 7, Field Change !OC-205; QC-3-2, " Storage Centrol," Revision 3; and QC-6-2, " Records and 1,..
k i:3.
b e
e
L L
6 l
E i-Filing System," Revisicn 7, Field Change fQC-266.
The inspeu'uc reviewed the records for the long neck flanges which included i'
Mill Test Report - Coffer Corporation #12118.
A material chemical and physical check were rade by the inspector.
The reco'rds for the split plate assenblies, Purchase Order (p0)
No. 7064-65-11. and records for the flexible gaskets, P0 No.
7064-65-4, were reviewcd.
Conformation Certificates for Material Shipped, Order 59703, Flexitallic Gasket Company, confirm leachable chloride to be less than 200 ppm as specified.
The inspector reviewed the QA data package and documentation indicating QA participation in the witnessing of vendor testing of the new tain steun relief valves. The documents reviewed included THI-2 Interoffice Memoranduas, dated July 13 and July 19,1978. The licensee witnessing inspection, Trip Report dated July 11, 1978, addresses the Confinnation of B&R Design Specification 2555-147, Main Steam Safety Valves.
The inspector reviewed Burns and Roe TWX to Dresser Valves, Inc., dated July 11, 1973, which also addresses the certification by 8&R that the Sargent and Lundy Design Specification, F-2761 and L-2761 meet or exceed the requirements of B&R Specification 2555-147.
The inspector deterained that documentation available attests to an active program to assure receipt of acceptable valves.
er No items of noncompliance were identified.
r c.
Weldinc The main stsam safety relief valve piping modification was in progress.
The pe
. rations to receive the long neck flanges had been finalized. The. fit-up and welding of the long neck flanges and the split' plate supports was in progress.
The inspector witnessed a part of the welding being performed on location 263, 223, and 253 in accordance with Crouse Company Incorporated Welding Sequence, dated July 1,1978.
The inspector visually exsnined the partially completed welds, per Weld Pro-cedure Specification GTA-SMA-1.1-P-102, including checks for slag, dirt, and crater indications. The weld at 278, which has been co pleted, was inspected and appeared to be smooth and clear of visual defects.
The inside diameter was inspected for contour and smoothness.
C 3
tf:>
. Q 49
- $s),+ fltjj*
%df,N
//
,,,//
,/h, NNv' IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3)
"l2lD32 1.0 Ba
,e
=
p=2 r
o I.I t
N 1
1.25 1.4 1.6 4
6" MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CH ART 46 4
+A 49%f#'
'4 p g
~
4 +:,;
5,,f 8
//
yy-4 i
.u-A
(_
\\J 1
t p
I 7
I l
The new weld rod ordered for the modification was checked for receipt and storage. The rods in use were inspected for dis-
~.
= bursing and handling controls.
At the receiving station the E-7018 filler rods were in
- her:etically sealed containers and tagged with QC release for construction, Tag. No. C-879.
The records for this order (P0 36590-8798) were inspected for Certified Materials Test Reports (Chantron No. 4029 and 4034) and receiving checklist.
The inspector checked the weld rod disbursing station for control of veld rod issuance, weld rod return, and oven weld rod storage.
The weld rod was being issued as documented on the Request for i
Welding Electrodes (GPU form).
The rebake oven was checked i
and did not contain any electrodes. The Mechanical Construction i
Procedure for " Control of Weld Rod and Consumable Insert,"
MCP 2-2, Revision 12, requires that weld rods, if not issued, should be placed in holding / storage ovens and maintained at 250:F + 25'F.
The inspector found the low hydrogen electrode storage oven tecperature indication at 190 F, which was below a
the required holding temperature, at approximately 8:00 a.m.,
on July 20, 1978.
This constitutes an infraction 'evel item 4
of nonc:mpliance (320/78-24-01).
The inspector checked the welders performance and procedures 3E qualifi ation records for the three in-process welds noted a bo te. The records of welders identified as F-5, F-9, and F-21 were reviewed and found acceptable.
d.
Post 'Jeld Heat Treatment l
l The inspector reviewed the draft post weld heat treatment pro-l cedure for FCR 2520.1, " Heat Tracing," Revision 0, dated July d
13, 1973, to verify that it complies with the USAS 831.7 Code requi re:ents.
Paragraph W.l.5.1.b does not fully comply, in that the heating and cooling rates above 600*F are greater than those allowed by the USAS B31.7 Code, paragraph 1-731.3.3.
This. item is considered unresolved pending a change in the procedure and subsequent review by NRC:RI (320/78-24-02).
j 1
l C
1 e
gm
^
(
b
=
E 8
E r
h e.
Hondestructive Examinations f
- 1..
The licensee is performing radiography on the long neck flange welds in accordance with Conam Nondestructive Testing procedure XR-1-NP.
The radiography is being performed using an Iridium-192 garca source, 87 Ci strength.
The procedure was reviewed and found to be acceptable and in accordance with ANSI B31.71969 and the 1970 addenda.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
k f.
Pla.;ned Testina The licensee plans to conduct a hydrostatic test of the completed
{f modification and a test of the main steam relief valves using a hydraulic ram followed by an actual lift.
The two procedures, TP 271.? and TP 209, are currently being finalized.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
g.
Mechanical Pioe Arrestors
~
For the relief valve / piping modification, mechanical pipe arrestors M3H-234-S (two with this number), MSH-280-S, and HSH-292-S appear to be stored, or partially engaged in a manner
gr which rakes then subject to damage. The licensee plans to mcdify pipe restraints MSH-230-5 and MSH-284-S (
Reference:
FCR No. 2520.1, Revision 1).
This FCR also requires units 230 and 284 to be removed to a new location.
Corrective action was in ;rogress to protect these units during the remaining work en the m.ain steam relief valve / piping modification.
The licenses stated that the suspect units will be checked for proper functioning prior to or during the test program following j'
the completion of the modification. The inspector had no further questions at this time.
No iter.s of noncompliance were identified.
L.
E:
5 S
TL
L t
9 4.
Review of Plant Ooerations p
a.
Shift Locs and Oceratino Records The' inspector reviewed the following logs and records:
Shift Foreman Log, Control Room Log Book, Centrol Room Operator's Log Sheets, Primary Auxiliary Operator's Log-Tour Raadings, Pricary Auxiliary Operator's Log-Liquid k'aste Disposal Panels, Secondary Auxiliary Operator's Log Sheets, and Auxiliary Operator Log Sheets-0It-Building Tcur; dated May 1 - July 31,1978.
Shift and Daily Checks; dated May 1 - July 25,1978.
Jumper, Lifted Lead, and Mechanical Modifications Log (active and cleared); entries cade during May 6 - July 31, 1978.
Fire Systen Removal frcm Service Notification Log; entries made during February 8 - July 31,1978.
Applications for Apparatus to be Taken Out of Service; those active on August 1,1978, and those cleared dated July 17-31,1978.
.F' Do Not Operate Tag Log; entries made during May 6 - July 31, 1978 Transient Cycle Log Sock; entries made during May 6 - July 31, 1378, and updated entries for the period February 8 -
May 5,1973.
Unit 2 Operations Department Memos 2-78-9 through 2-78-15.
The logs and re:ords were reviewed to verify the following items.
Lc; keeping practices and log bcok reviews are conducted in accordance wich established administrative controls.
Log entries involving abnormal conditions are sufficiently detailed.
f.:-
p b
i qus49$ 8*94 ** # # 6 e
M4 a
i g
.a
~
10 Operating orders do not conflict with Technical Specifica-i' tions (TSs).
Ju:per log and tagging log entries do not conflict with TSs.
Jumper / lifted lead / mechanical codification and tagging operations are conducted in conforrance with established
~
ad:inistrative controls.
Probles identification reports confirm compliance with TS
=
reporting and LCO requiremants.
6..
Acceptance criteria for the above review included i'nspector e
jud;ecent and requirements of applicable Technical Specifications and the following procedures.
Station Ad inistrative Procedure (SAP) 1002, " Rules for the Protection of Employees Working on Electrical and Me-hanical Apparatus," Revision 12.
SA? 1010, ' Technical Specification Surveillance Program,"
Revisicn 12, TCN 2-78-507.
SA? 1011, 'Centrolled Xey Locker Control," Revision 16.
S/21012, ' Shift Relief and Log Entries," Revision 8.
SA? 1013, ' Bypass of Safety Fur.ctions and Jumper Control,"
Revisien 7.
SA) 1016, 'Operatiens Surveillance Program," Revision 12.
SA) 1033, ' Operating Memos and Standing Orders," Original.
SA) 1037, ' Control of Caution Tags," Original.
The ins;ectcr noted that the Transient Cycle Log Book had been updated and the administration of controls for lif ted leads and jum;ers had it. proved since the last inspection in this area.
The ins;ect:r's findings regarding shift logs and operating records were acceptable.
Ef b,
i I
j:.
f.
-~
(5 N-7 11 b.
Plant Tour
-On August 2-3, 1978, the inspector conducted a tour of the
\\
following accessible plant areas.
Auxiliary Building Turbine Building Fuel Handling Building Control Room Switchgear Rooms Inverter and Battery Rcoms Diesel Rooms Chemical Addition Room Makeup Pump Rocms Building Spray. Pug.p and Decay Heat Pump Vaults y7 Evaporator Room l
The following observations / discussions / determinations were made.
Ccntrol Room and local monitoring instrumentation for various components and parameters was observed, including diesel fuel oil levels, control rod positions, and RCS pressure and temperature.
Radiation controls established by the licensee, including the posting of radiation and high radiation areas, the condition of step-off pads, and the disposal of protective clothing, were observed.
Radiation work permits used for entry to radiation and controlled areas were reviewed.
G O
2.I,
-(_
\\-
iu
[
12 Plant housekeeping, including general cleanliness condi-tions and storage of materials and. components to prevent safety and fire hazards, was observed.
Systems and ecuipment in all areas toured were observed for the existence of fluid leaks and abnormal piping vibrations.
Selected piping snubbers / restraints were observed for proper fluid level and condition / proper hanger settings.
The ir.dicated positions of electrical power supply breakers and selected control board equipment start switches and remote-operated valves and the a.ctual positions of selected manual-operated valves were observed.
Selected equip ent lockout tags, caution tags, and Do-Not-Operate tags were observed for proper posting and the tagged equipment was observed for proper positioning, where applicable.
Selected junper and lifted lead markers were observed fer proper identification and the effected wiring changes were observed for propar completion.
jg-The Centrol Scard was observed for annunciators that normally should not be lighted during the existing plant conditions.
The reasons for the annunciators were discussed with control rcom operators.
The licensee's policy and practice regarding plant tours was reviewed.
Control Rosa manning was observed on several occasions during the inspection.
Acceptance criteria for the above items included inspector jud;ement and requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(k), Regulatory Guide 1.114, applicable Technical Specifications, and the following procedures.
SA? 1032, " Rules for the Protection of Employees Working on Electrical and Mechanical Apparatus," Revision 12.
He 44 m
L.
t 13 SAP 1003, " Radiation Protection Manual," Revision 12.
SAP 1008, " Good Housekeeping," Revision 3.
SAP 1009, " Station Organization and Chain of Command,"
Ravision 3.
SAP 1028, " Operator'at the Controls," Original.
sap 1037, " Control of Caution Tags," Original.
The inspector's finding regarding the plant tours were accept-able, except as noted below:
The inspector noted that general cleanliness conditions in the auxiliary building upper levels had improved since the last inspection in this area.
However, cleanliness and meterial storage conditions in the auxiliary building basement, including the BS and DH vaults, and in the reacter building require correction.
Licensee representa-tives were aware of the degraded conditions in these areas and have scheduled appropriate cleanup and removal of excess material prior to heatup or resuming power operation.
The ir.spector had no further questions concerning this matter at this time.
'gr During observation of control room and local annunciators, the inspector noted an inconsistency in diesel generator ala rms.
The Low Lube Oil Day Tank Level Alarm was lighted on both local annunciator panels, but on only one control rcom panel.
Licensee representatives stated that the a;?arently out-of-service alarm would be investigated.
The licensee's investigation of this alarm is considered an unresolved item (320/78-24-03).
5.
!;onreutine Event Review
~
The inspecter reviewed the licensee's system for. identification, review, reporting, and followup of nonroutine events.
The review was performed to determine that responsibilities have been assigned for the itacs listed below:
i
~ ~. ~ _. _ _ _ _ _ _
'l
C b
14 l
t Prempt review and evaluation of off-normal operating events to assure identification of safety related events.
Franpt review of planned and unplanned maintenance and testing activities to assure identification of violations of Technical Specification LCO requirements.
Reporting safety related operating events internally and to the NRC.
Assuring ccmpletion of corrective actions relating to safety related operating events.
Administrative controls for reporting nonroutine events are described in GP 4703. There is no administrative procedure which specifies responsibilities for nonroutine event identification, review, and followup.
Licensee representatives stated that these functions are inherently perfcnned by facility management, PORC members, and licensed operators, based on their knowledge of Technical Specifi-cations reporting requirerrtents. Nonroutine events are identified during shift forem.an review of Control Room logs and completed surveillance procedcres, PORC review of completed maintenance activ-ities, and departmental supervisory review of rcutine operations.
Reportable r.atters are promptly referred to facility management and s-PORC for review and evaluation. Applicable corrective actions are tracked for completion by designation as PORC Action Items.
The inspector noted that the licensee's functions associated with non-routine events have been acceptable since license issuance and had no further cuestions concerning this matter.
6.
In-Office Review of Licensee Event Reoorts (LER's) l The LER's listed below were r viewed in the Region I office promptly following receipt to verify tuat details of the event we.re clearly reported including the accuracy of the description of cause and the adequacy of corrective action.
The LER's were aiiso reviewed to deter-mine whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were involved, whether the event should be classified as an Abnormal Occurrence, and whether the event warranted onsite followup.
i:
L u
15
(
i The following LER's were reviewed:
f_
LER 78-2?/3L, dated Fay 4,1978; NS-V838 failed to open during surveillance testing due to rr.alfunction of solenoid-operated' pilot valve.
LER 78-25/3L, dated May 2,1978; RCS wide range pressure trans-mitter RC-2A-PT4 failed due to moisture induced short circuit
/
in the transmitter teminal box.
LEP. 78-27/lT, dated Fay 2,1978; Error in small break LOCa safety analysis.
LER 78-28/3L, dated May 3,1978; DC-V103 failed to close during SFAS surveillance testing due to a failed motor on the valve operatcr.
LEP, 78-29/3L, dated May 10, 1978; Ventilation damper D-4098 failed to close during surveillance testing due to improperly adjusted linkage.
LER 78-30/2L, dated May 17, 1978; R?S Channel C tripped on Hi Flux due to damage of NI-7 during initial installation.
LER 78-31/3L, dated May 18,1978; CA-V3 failed to completely c1cse during SFAS surveillace testing due to incorrect torque switch setting.
LER 73-33/1T, dated May 8,1978; Reactor trip followed by RCS [
depressurizatica and sodium hydroxide injection, due to steam generatar safety valves act properly reseating.
LEP, 78-34/17, dated May P.,1978; Degradation of main steam safety valve discharge piping.
LER 78-35/17, dated May 9,1978; Unit auxiliary transfonners incapable of carrying full ioad and ESF auxiliaries during periods of peak demand.
LER 78-36/17, dated May 18, 1978; Error in uncertainties applied to inccre detector measurements of imaalance and quadrant power j
tilu.
denotes those LER's selected for onsite followup.
i
!l r
som o
(
A.
.s 16 g[
LER 78-37/3L, dated May 25, 1978; Emergency Diesel Generator b
"B" failed surveillance test and tripped on high crankcase pressure due to undetermined cause.
LER 78-38/3L, dated June 12, 1978; k'hile performing monthly surveillance, the setting of BS-PS-3260 was found to be 0.02 psig higher than TS limit due to instrument drift.
LER 78-39/3L, dated June 15, 1978; Emergency Diesel Generator "B" failed to start during surveillance testing due to failure of the vertical shaft between the upper and lower crank shafts, caused by improper material.
LER 78-40/3L, dated June 15, 1978; Chiller AH-C-8B failed to i
operate during surveillance testing due to a microswitch that
[.
had a rough edge on its stea.,
=
p LER 78-41/3L, dated June 15, 1978; Emergency Diesel Generator "B" tripped on high crankcase pressure during surveillance test due to partially plugged orifice plate to the crankcase vacuum ejector.
LER 78-42/3L, dated July 14, 1978; During surveillance testing the Damper 4092c accumulator pressure could not be maintained er within 10 psi of the initial pressure due to improper location of the associated 3-way valve.
LER 78-43/3L, dated July 10, 1978; Deficient floor fire barrier
~
penetration seal due to improperly cured foam material used to make the seal.
LER 78-44/3L, dated July 24, 1978; Panual output breaker G2-lE2 for the "A" Diesel Generator was not closed when the unit was placed in emergency star.dby, due to a procedure inadequacy.
[
The above LER's were closed, based on satisfactory review in the Region I office, except those LER's selected for onsite followup.
O denotes those LER's ta,lected for onsite followup, me I
=
f..
E E
E L-l
- - e* o+ = e e
\\.
.c_.
17 il' 7.
Onsite Licensee Event Followuo
[
For those LER's selected for onsite followup (denoted in Paragraph S), the inspector verified that the reporting requirements of Technical Specifications and GP 4703 (Original) had been met, that appropriate corrective action had been taken, that the event was reviewed by the licensee as required by Technical Specifications, and that continued operation of the facility was conducted in con-formance with Technical Specification limits.
The inspector's findings regardi. these licensee events were acceptable, unless otherwise noted below.
Corrective measures associated with-LER's 78-33/1T and 78-34/lT are being tracked for completion by PORC Action Item 2-78-025.
The ECCS actuation of April 23, 1978, and the licensee's evalua-tion of the transient and designation of corrective actions were reviewed during a previous inspection, as described in OIE Inspection Report 50-320/78-17, paragraph 8.
Modi fica tions of the main steam safety relief valves and piping, to prevent recurrence of excessive valve blowdown, are described in para-graph 3 of this report.
The above LER's stated that prior to criticality the relief valves will be tested for proper lift pressure and also to insure that blowdown is not excessive.
'gr Completion of satisfactory relief valve testing prior to criti-cality is an unresolved item (320/78-24-04).
The inspector noted that some of the LER's reviewed onsite contained coding errors or narrative omissions.
Specific examples of these reporting inadequacies and the requirements of NUREG-0161, " Instructions for Preparation of Date Entry Sheets for Licensee Event Report (LER) File," were discussed with licensee representatives.
The inspector stated that updated reports were not required to correct the identified errors.
Licensee representatives stated that appropriate action would be taken to ensure that future LER forms are complete and accurate.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
=
L I
C E
1;
~
LER 78-44/3L contained inadequata narrative descriptions of the event and the cause.
A licensee representative stated that an update LER would be sub=itted to correct these reporting discrepancies. Licensee submission of an update LER and com-pletion of personnel instruction to ensure that proper diesel generator electrical lineup is established and maintained is an unresolved iten (320/78-24-05).
8.
IE Eulletin and Circuter.'ollowuo The inspector reviewed the licensee's followup actions regarding the IE Bulletins and Circulars listed below.
IEB 77-07, " Containment Electrical Penetration Assemblies at Nuclear Power Plants Under Construction," dated December 19, 1977.
IES 78-01, "Flarmable Contact-Arm Retainers in General Electric (GE) CR120A Relays," dated January 15, 1978.
IEB 78-02, " Terminal Bleck Qualification," dated January 30, 1978.
IES 78-04, " Environmental Qualification of Certain Stem Mounted Limit Switches Inside Reacter Centair. ment," dated February 21,
,e 1973.
..e IES 78-05, " Malfunctioning of Circuit Breaker Auxiliary Contact Mechanism - General Electric Model CR105X, dated April 14, 1978.
IEB 78-06, " Defective Cutler-Hamner Type M Relays with DC Coils," dated May 31, 1978.
IEC 78-04, " Installation Error That Could Prevent Closing of Fir? Doors," dated May 18, 1978.
IEC 78-05, ' Inadvertent Safety Inf ection During Cooldown,"
dated May 25, 1978.
IEC 78-07, " Damaged Components on a Bergen-Patterson Series 25000 Hydraulic Test Stand," dated Kay 31, 1978.
This review included discussions with licensee personnel, review of selected facility records, and observation of selected facility equignent and co:ponents.
i C
k.
[:S E
19 5
E L
h With respect to the above Bulletins, the inspector verified that licensee management forwerded copies of the bulletin response to
=
appropriate ensite cunagement representatives, that infonnation and corrective action discussed in the reply was accurate and effected as described, and that the reply was subtitted within the time period described in the bulletins.
F p
With respect to the above Circulars, the inspector verified that the circular was received by appropriate licensee management, a review for applicability was performed, and that action taken or plar.ned is appropriate.
Acceptance criteria for the above review included inspector judgement and requirerents of applicable Technical Specifications and facility F
procedures.
.=
Licensee followup to the above Bulletins and Circulars was acceptable, unless otheraise noted below.
IES 78-01 concerned fire damage of several GE CR120A relays which occurred at ar.other facility. The fire was attributed
~ to an overheated relay coil that ignited the relay's plastic contact-am retainer.
The corrective action recommended by GE was to replace the flameble Celcon retainers of designated
.c relays with improved self-extinguishing flame resistant Valo:
retainers.
The 1icensee has 'eter:nined that many of the GE CR120A and CR122 relays installed in safety related and balance of plant equipment have the Celcon centact-ara retainers.
A list of all such relays has been cocpiled, ar.d necessary replace:nent Valoz-type retainers have been ordered.
Burns and Roe ECM S-5989 has been approved to perform retainer replacement.
Licensee conpletion of ECM S-5989 upon receipt of replacement materials is considered an unresolved item (320/78-24-06).
IEB 78-05 concerned a problem encountered with the operation
~
of a GE Model CP.105X auxiliary contact trechanism at another facility.
An' auxiliary contact had failed in the closed positica due to binding of the plunger arm caused by burrs and nicks on its surface.
The corre:tive action recomended by GE was to replace the plunger am of affected relays.
p I
h p
=
~~
ee-
. ww
\\
~
[
[
20 I
The licensee has determined that 32 GE NEMA size 1 contactors are installed in safety related systems and 94 such contactors are used in balance of plant equipment.
Each of these contactors has.one to three model CR 105X100P auxiliary contact mechanisms.
No binding problems have been encountered with these as of this date. However, the licensee plans to replace the potentially binding mechanisms in the appropriate equipment as well as in the spares inventory.
HEC Tetter to NRC Region I serial GQL 1021, dated May 30, 1978, stated that changeout will be completed as soon as possible but not later than the end of the first regularly scheduled refueling outage.
The inspector determined that ne:essary replacement parts have not yet been ordered, acc:mplishnant of the changeout has not yet been scheduled or directed by an ECM. Since implementation of the changeout may not be fully completed for an extended period, the inspector noted that any long-term deferrals in changeout should be tacinically supported and justified. The basis for deferral should include a review of the function and safety significance of each affected auxiliary contact mechanism and a review of routine che:ks cr ccmponent surveillance that is performed to demcnstrate continued equipment operability until changeout is em:pleted.
Licensee completion of actions concerning IEB 75 ~5 is considered an unresolved item (320/78-24-07).
r 9.
In-Office Review of Measures Established to Imolement 10 CFR Part 21' Recuirements The ;ar.eraticn procedures listed below were reviewed in the Region I office.
G? C075, Revision 0, Change 1 (November 18,1977)," Reporting of Cefe:ts and Noncompliance as Required by 10 CFR 21."
G? CO29 Revisien 3 (January 2,1978), " Generation Division Scn:onicnnances."
G? C063, Revisicn 0, Change 3 (March 13,1978), " Record Control."
G? 1009, Revision 1, Change 3 (April 10,1978), " Procurement Deccment Control."
G? 1011, Revision 1, Change 2 (October 18,1977)," Preparation, Changing, and 1 Issuance of Specifications and Bills of Material."
N 3=
- .^.-
21 GP 1024, Revision 3, Change 2 (February 28,1978), "Identifi-cation and Evaluation of Nonebnforming Materials, Parts, and
{c Components."
.E-GP 4005, Revision 2, Change 3 (February 15. 1978', " Review of Procurement Documents."
1
- =
GP 4012; Revision 4, Change 2 (May 8,1978), "Nonconformance JL Reports, and Stop Work Orders."
=
GP 4414, Revision 0 (February 14,1978), " Receipt Deficiency
[
Reporting. "
.m.
GP 4705, Revision 0 (December 3,1977), " Licensing Reviews hz for Reportability."
E.
The procedures were reviewed to verify that the procedures or controls listed below have been established and are adequate to assure imple-mentation of 10 CFR Part 21 requirements.
Controls or procedures for posting (21.6).
Procedures for evaluating deviations or informing the licensee or purchaser of deviat' ns (21.21(a)).
_w-s-
Procedures for infonaing a director or responsible officer of:
- 1) deviations evaluated to be a defect, or 2) failures to comply relating to a substantiated safety hazard (21.21(a)).
Controls or procedures which will assure that a director or f
responsible officer will inform the Commission as required b-when receiving information of a defect or reportable failure
~
to comply (21.21(b)).
w:
Controls or procedures to assure that each procurement document for a facility or basic component, when applicable, specifies that provisions of 10 CFR Part 21 apply (21.31).
Controls or pYocedures to assure licensee maintenance of 5-records (21.51(a)).
f.=-
Controls or procedures to assure the preparation and appropriate disposition of records (21.51(b)).
=...
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9' ki
==
=-
=
o
(
s b-E...
22 2.i V
10.
In-Office Review of Periodic and Soecial Reoorts The periodic and special reports listed below were reviewed in the
{l Region I. office to verify that the report included infomation required.to be reported and that test results and/or supportir.g in-
~
famation discussed in the report were censistent with design pre-dictions and perfortrance specifications, as applicable.
The reports
~
were also reviewed to ascertain whether planned corrective action was adecuate for resolution of identified problems, where applicable, and to detemine whether any inforTaation contained in the report should te classified as an Abnomal Occurrence.
The following TMI 2 periodic reports were reviewed.
I.:.
February Operating Report, dated March 13, 1978.
~
P. arch Operating Report, dated April 13, 1978.
April Operating Report, dated May 15, 1978.
V.ay Operating Report, dated June 15, 1978.
June Operating Report, dated July 13, 1978.
The following TMI 2 special' reports were reviewed.
Report of ECCS Actuation of March 29, 1978, dated June 27, 1978.
Report of ECCS Actuation of April 23, 1978, dated July 24, 1978.
The above reports were closed based on satisfactory review at the Region I office.
11.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncernpliance, or deviations.
Unresolved iteas disclosed during the inspection areldiscussed in Paragraphs 3.d, 4.b, 7, and 8.
12.
Exit Interview The inspector cet With licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph
- 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 3,1978.
The in-
.~..
spector su:rarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the e.
findings.
j!E:
i":
m
.-