ML19347E853
| ML19347E853 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1981 |
| From: | Jerrica Johnson, Keimig R, Sanders W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347E852 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-81-03, 50-293-81-3, NUDOCS 8105140040 | |
| Download: ML19347E853 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000293/1981003
Text
.
.
.
.
O
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Region I
I
Report No.
50-293/81-03
S g
I
Occket No.
50-293
5
Category
C'
.w
License No. OPR-35
Priority
--
,
%
,
Licensee:
Boston Edi. ton Cemeany
800 Boylston Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
Facility Name:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
Inspection at:
Plymouth, Massachusetts
Inspection conducted:
February 2-6,11-13, 23 and 27,1981
Inspectors:
bli
- // o / F/
am
4/ Jennio), Senior Resident Inspector
date' signed
L< Whe&J
</s hi
W. Sar:cers, Reactor Inspector
/ d(te signed
(Feb.-uary 2,1981)
data signed
,
Approved by:
C
4 = f"
[ M"'N
. 41 mig ,4
IngQ1pt,neactor
date signed
/R
n IB
rejects Secr4
Inspection Summary:
Areas Inscected: Routine, unannounced inspection of plant , operations including an
operational safety verification, followup of events, maintenance activities,
and licensee actions in response to IE Bulletins. The inspection involved 31
inspector-hours by the resident inspector and region based inspector.
l
Resul ts : No items of noncompliance were identified in the four areas inspected.
!
l
I
l
l
Region I Form 12
l
(Rev. April 77)
810514o MD
-
.
'.
.
CETAILS
1.
persons Contacted
J.
Aboltin, Reactor Engineer
F.
Famulari. QA Group Leader
J.
Fulton, Sr. Licensing Engineer
R.
Kuhn, Sr. ALARA Engineer
"G.
LaFond, Nuclear Control Technician
R.
Machon, Nuclear Operations Manager (Pilgrim Station)
C.
Mathis, Deputy Nuclear Operations Manager
R.
Reposa, QC Inspector (Contract NDE Level III)
- P.
Willard, I&C Engineer
- E.
Ziemianski, Management Sarvices Group Leader
.
The inspector also interviewed other members of the health physics,
operations, maintenance, security, and technical staffs.
- Cenotes those present at exit interview on February 2,1981.
2.
Follewuo on previous Insoection Findig
(0 pen) Nancompliance (293/81-02-02) The inspector reviewed Revision 6
to. procedure No.1.4.9, " Storage, Handling and Disposal of Sodium
Pentaborate", dated February 4,1981, which allows storage of pdrtially
used containers of Borax in the Standby Liquid Control area. This
item remains open pending review of additional licensee actions.
3.
Goerational Safety Verification
a.
Scoce
The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed selected
logs and records, conducted discussions with control room operators,
and verified the lineuo of selected emergency systems. Tours of
the control room, station yard, intake structure, reactor building
and vital switchgear rooms were conducted. The inspector's
observations included a review of plant equipment condition,
potential fire hazards, physical security, housekeeping, implementation
of radiation protection controls, and control room annunciators.
These reviews and observations were conducted in order to verify
conformance with the Code of Federal Regulations, the facility
Technical Specifications, and the licensee's administrative
procedures.
b.
Findings
(1) The inspector reviewed station procedure No. 3.M.3-16,
" Electrically Backseating Motor Operated Valves (MOV)",
Revision 1, dated February 4,1981, which was revised
following previous discussions with the 1.icensee. This
l
,
t
1
---
-
_.
_ _ , _
. . . . . - - - .
_
.-
.
.
.
3
procedure requires a check list to be filled out to document
the procedure steps and the associated technical data.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
(2) During a tour of the
'A' 4160v switchgear room on February 12, 1981,
the inspector questioned the licensee concerning the purpose
of a portable battery chargsr that was plugged into a wall
socket and which had the d'. rect current outlet leads going
into the ' A' Battery room.
The inspector toured the ' A' Battery room with the on-duty
Watch Engineer and verified that the portable charger was
being used to maintain the charge on a set of spare 125v
.
batteries not connected to the bus, and being stored for
future use.
The inspector verified operability of the normal station
24v,125v, and 250v batteries and associated chargers, and
had no further questens.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
(3) The inspector reviewed the licensee's progress with clearing
control room annunciators that were either in alarm or de-
energized. At the end of this month there were approxiamtaly
twenty four (24) annunciators in the alarm condition and
seventeen (17) that had been deactivated with the alarm card
pulled.
The inspector observed that noticeable progress had been
made in clearing several annunciators associated with the
Although the inspector did nct identify any items of non-
compliance with the Technical Specification limiting conditions
for operation for the equipment associated with these
annunciators, concerns were expressed to the licensee re-
garding the priorities and manpower associated with this
task.
The inspector reviewed a memorandum dated February 19, 1981
from the Deputy Nuclear Operations Manager to the Nuclear
Operations Support Manager requesting tssistance from a de-
sign engineer to aid station personnel in evaluating main-
tenance and plant design changes needed to clear the unnecessary
annunciators. This memo also addressed the need to eliminate
many potentially unnecessary caution tags on the control
room panels. The lic:nsee stated that engineering assistance
,
was expected to be available on sita following,the plant
'
outage scheduled to end about M:rch 9, 1981.
l
'
!
-
i
I
-
.
- - - .
.
.
.
4
The inspector will continue to review the licensee's
progress in this area during future routine inspections
and daily control room tours.
No items of noncompliance were identified during this operational safety
verification.
4.
Followuo on Events Occurring Ouring the Insoection
a.
Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Unidentified Leakage on
Feeruary 2,1981 and Feoruary 23, 1981
The inspector verified that the licensee's reports and responses
met the requirements of station procedures, Technical Specification
(T.S.) 3.6.C.3, and 10 CFR 50.72. On both occasions the
inspector verified that a reactor shutdown was initiated and
that the leakage was reduced to less than the T.S. Ifmit (5
gpm) withing 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The 'A'
and 'B' recirculation system suction and discharge
valves were electrically backsaated because of packing leakage.
The licensee stated that these valves were scheduled to be re-
packed during the maintenance outage planned for the first
week in March,1981.
Licensee Event Report No. 81-05 describes this event.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
HpCI System Inocerable on February 23, 1981
!
The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions following abservation
of erratic speed and flow control of the HPCI turbine during
routine surveillance testing. This review was performed to
verify that the requirements of station procedures and T.S.
3.5.C.2 were met.
,
The inspector observed selected surveillances for radundant
equipment on February 23, 1981 and reviewed documentation to
verify that testing required by T.S. 4.5.C.2 was perfonned
between February 24, 1981 and February 26, 1981.
The licensee completed repairs to the turbine control system
and flow. test line orifice, satisfactorily tested the HPCI
system on Febroary 27, 1981 withing the seven (7) day limit
allowed by T.S., and resumed routine operation.
No items of noncompliance were identified during this review.
-
.
'.
-
5
<
c.
Potential for loss of Coolant Outside primary Containment-
On February 25, 1981, during a telephone conversation between
the licensee management and IE Region I personnel, the licensee
reported the potential for a loss of coolant and Reactor
Coolant System depressurization during an ATWS event. This
was identified during an engineering evaluation of the scram
discharge air system in response to recent NRC concerns in
thic area.
The physical location of the ATWS Alternate Rod Insertion
(ARI) solenoid valves could allow insertion of control rods
without the scram discharge vent and drain valves closing.
The licensee stated that existing Emergency Procedures were
reviewed and verified that immediate operator actions during
an ATWS event would result in closing the vent and drain
1
valves.
The licensee also stated that an entry in the Watch Engineer's
Instruction Log would be made to emphasize this potential to
all shifts and that the scram air header system would be
mcdified during an cutage preytously planned for the first
week of March,1981.
The inspector reviewed procedure No. 5.3.1.5, " Reactor Isolation
Without Scram or Loss of Offsite Power (ATWS)", Revision 4,
and verified that immediate operator actions include a saanual
'
reactor scram and deenergizing tne reactor protection system
power supplies.
The inspector also verified that an entry in the Watch Engineer's
inscruction log was made on February 25, 1981 describing this
potential event, and that on February 28, 1981 the reactor was
placed in cold shutdown for the maintenance outage.
,
~
,
This event is described in Licensee Evedt Report No. 81-04.
j
No items of compliance were idantified, however, pending
completion of sodification to the scram air header, this item
is considered unresolved (293/81-03-01).
5.
Maintenance Activities
The inspector reviewed the licensse's !.:tivities associcted with
the maintenance itsas listed below to serify that the repairs were
conducted in accordance with approved station maintenance ;rocedures
>
'
and the Technical Specifications.
!
-
,
a
,
~
, , ,
-- -
.
'
6
Maintenance Request (M.R.) No. 81-27-2; Repair of Main Condenser
--
Outlet Piping
M.R. No.80-227; Replacement of Control Rod Drive Accumulator
-
(for rod no. 34-11).
The inspector reviewed the maintenance requests for proper authori:ation,
verified the associated equipment control / personnel safety tagging
and reviewed selected material quality documentation.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
IE Bulletin Followuo
The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions in response to the IE
Bulletins listed below to verify that the actions and responses
adequately addressed the concerns of the Bulletin.
IE3 80-11; " Masonry Wall Design"
-
Tne inspector reviewed the licensee's responses dated July 14, 1980,
and November 5, 1980. The licensee has completed a survey of
ali masonry walls and is in the process of performing system
identification and reevaluation. The licensee stated that
because of the magnitude and scope of the actions required,
approximately 250 walls will require analysis and that the
completion of reevaluation is estimated to extend to August, 1981.
The inspector requestad the licensee for a supplemental re-
sponse that would include a current status, a detailed schedule
for completion of reevaluation of each of the four groups of
walls, and a description of the licensee's reevaluation criteria.
The licensee stated that a supplemental response would be
provided by March 6, 1981, which would include these items.
,
}
This Sulletin remains open pending review of additier, actions
by the licensee including completion of the reevaluation
"
program and a review of the licensee's reevaluation criteria.
IE3 80-17; " Failure of Control Rods to Insert During a Scram
-
at a BWR", Supplement 4.
The inspection performed on the
Scram Discharge Volume (SDV) hardware was related to I.E.
Bulletin 80-17, Supplement 4, " Failure of Control Rods to
Insert During a Scram at a BWR" which requested assurance that
the cont.inuous monitoring system (CMS) for the scram discharge
)
volume header (SOV) has been tested to demonstrate operability
as installed, remains operable during plant operations, and is
pericdically tested to demonstrate continued operability.
'
'
.
.
.
_ _ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _
_
I
'
7
The equipment installed is called an " Ultra Sonic Water Sleuth"
which is a digital ultrasonic thickness gaging system.
It is
designed to detect the presence of a predetermined liquid
level (1.25 2 0.25 inches of water) inside a closed horizontal
carbon stec1 header (approx. 8" in diameter) and to initiate
an alarm when that level is reached or exceeded. The equipment
is designed to monitor the pipe wall thickness on another
channel, generate an alarm on loss of signal, loss of couplant,
or power failure. The water Sleuth operates on an ultrasonic
pulse-echo principal. The equipment has dual-channel receivers,
one of the channels monitors the actual water level, while the
other channel provides a continuous check on wall thickness,
couplant and much of the channel's electronics. The water
level channel has an adjustable alarm system to indicate when
the water level exceeds the predetermined limit and the other
channel when it is no operating properly.
A visual inspection was performed on the installation of the
water sleuth electronic cabinet and the installation of four
ultrasonic level monitors (two in each scra.n discharge header).
It was noted that backup manual ultrasonic equipment was
available for cross check and calibration purposes. The
inspection also included:
Review of system description and schematic drawings for
-
the apparatus and associated electronics
Calibration criteria
-
Training of personnel for performing the calibrations.
-
.
System annunciator an status indicators in the control
-
room.
Inspection of brackets designed for holding the UT sensors
-
with the required alignment and pressure.
Removal of paint and scale at transducer ccntact area on
-
Within the scope of the inspection, no items of nonccmpliance
were identified.
This Bulletin remains open pending a review of additional
licensee actions required including further operability and
surveillance tasts.
-
e
, -
ry..-%
-
.-s
- _
w.
.,
__
-
s
8
7.
Unresolved Items
Areas for which more information is required to determine accept-
ability are coasidered unresolved. An unresolved item is discussed
in Paragraph 4.c.
8.
Exit Interview
At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings
were held with senior facility management to discuss tne inspection
scope and findings.
The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in
Paragraph 1) o'n February 2,1981 and summarized the findings
relating to the licensee's actions in response to IE Bulletin 80-
17, Supplement 4.
.
4
l
i
,
1
_
_
_
_ _ . ,