ML20004C575
| ML20004C575 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1981 |
| From: | Keimig R, Mccann J, Tanya Smith NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20004C571 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-81-03, 50-213-81-3, NUDOCS 8106040291 | |
| Download: ML20004C575 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000213/1981003
Text
.
-
-
.
.
..
'
.
'U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Region I
Report No. 50-213/81-03
Docket No. 50-213
License No. DPR-61
Priority
Category
C
-
Licensee:
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company
P.O. Box 270
Hartford, Connecticut 06101
Facility Name:. Haddam Neck Plant
Inspection at:
Haddam, Connecticut
A
Inspection conduct ?
ddrch -1 - April 10,1981
Inspectors:
Ed
4,
/r'f<fp/
T.H. SMITH, SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR
ddte signed
$$_L
& zc,/9H
. McCANN, REACTOR INSPECTOR
date signed
,
date signed
Approved by:
/
f /#- T/
m
.R.
KEIF
, ACTI
CHIEF, REACTOR
date signea
/ PROJECTS
ECTI0B
B, Division of
Resident and Prc ect Inspection
Inspection Summary:
INSPECTION ON MARCH 1 - APRIL 10, 1981 (REPORT No. 50-213/81-03)
AREAS INSPECTED: Routine, unannounced inspection of plant operations including:
tours of the facility; log and record review; licensee action on pretious inspection
findings; licensee action on Bulletins and Circulars; surveillance activities;
operating events; Licensee Event Reports; and TMI Action Plan Items. The inspection
involved 95 inspector-hours by the resident inspector and one regional based
inspector.
RESULTS: Of the eight areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were found in seven
areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was found in the remaining area (failure to
properly review surveillance test results - paragraph 6).
Region I Form 12
(Rev. April 77)
g106040,79j
.
- .
- k
-
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
I
The below listed technical and supervisory-personnel were among
those contacted:
G. H. Bouchard, Maintenance Supervisor
N. A. Burnette, Technical Assistant
T. W. Campbell, Instrument and Control Supervisor
>
H. E. Clow, Health Physics Supervisor
J. H. Ferguson, Station Services Superintendent
R. L. Gracie, Operations Assistant
R. H. Graves, Station Superintendent
G. R. Hallberg, Security Supervisor
J. M.- Levine, Operations Supervisor
,
R. Z. Test, Engineering Supervisor
R. P. Traggio, Unit Superintendent
Other licensee staff and operating personnel were also -interviewed
during the course of the inspection.
j
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
'
- (Closed) Unresolved Item (213/78-02-01):
Failure of diesel generator
load sequence timers. The load sequence timers which exhibited a
,
high failure rate were replaced by timers manufactured by a different
j
company. No problems have been identified with the new timers. This
!
item is resolved.
(
,
3.
Review of Plant Operation - Plant Tours
a.
During the course of the inspection, the inspector conducted
multiple tours of the following plant areas:
-
'
-- Control Room
-- Primary Auxiliary Building
.
-- Vital Switchgear Room
l
-- Diesel Generator Rooms
i
-- Turbine Building
!
-- Intake Building
!
-- Control Point
-- Security Building
-- Yard Areas
i
!
i
l
'
!
-
,
.
- . , ,
.
- - - > _ , .
-
-
,,
,,-
~ . . , , --
.
..
3'
.
.
.
b.
The following observations / determinations were made:
-
-- Radiation protection controls. Step-off pads, storage and
disposal of protective clothing and control of high radiation
areas were observed for adequacy in all areas toured.
No
unsatisfactory conditions were observed.
'
-- Monitoring instrumentation. The inspector verified that selected
instruments were functioning properly and that the displayed-
'
parameters were within Technical Specification limits.
'
-- Control room annunciators. Lighted annunciators were discussed
with control room operators to verify that the reasons for them
were understood and corrective action, if required, was being
,
taken. On average, only one or two annunciators were lighted
on each control room visit.
-- Valve positions. The inspector verified that selected valves
l
were in a position or condition required by the Technical
Specifications. -No unsatisfactory conditions were identified.
-- Plant housekeeping. Housekeeping was observed in all areas
toured, including control of flanzable material. No unsatisfactory
- conditions were identified.
,
-- Fluid leaks. All areas toured were examined for evidence of
excessive fluid leaks. None were found.
,
t
-- Piping vibrations. All areas toured were examined for evidence
!
of excessive piping vibration. None were indicated.
!
-- Control room manning. The inspector verified that control room
!
manning requirements of the Technical Specifications were being
l
j
met.
-- Security. During the inspection, observations were made of plant
!
security, including adequacy of physical barriers, access control,
!
vehicle control, and searches. No unace.eptable conditions were
!
identified.
l
l
4.
Shift Logs and Operating Records
a.
The inspector reviewed selected operating logs and records against
i
th requirements of the following procedures
,
,
i
-- ADM 1.1-5, Control Room Operating Log;
i
-- QA 1.2-14.1, Bypass and Jumper Control;
i
-- ADM 1.1-43, Control Room Area Limits for Control Operators;,
-- NOP 2.2-2, Steady State Operation and Surveillance;
-
-
.
..
.
- -
- . . - .
. .
- .
. . . . . -
. - . - - . . , . - l
.-
4
-
.
.
-- ADM 1.1-44, Shift Relief and Turnover;
-- QA 1,2-2.4, Housekeeping Requirements;
-- QA 1.2-16.1, Plant Information Reports; and
-- QA 1.2-14.2, Equipment Control .
1
b.
Shift logs and operating records' were reviewed to verify that:
-- Control Room log sheet entries are filled out and initialed;
-- Auxiliary log sheets are filled out and initialed;
-- Control Room log entries involving abnormal conditions provide
sufficient detail to communicate equipment status, lockout
status, correction and restoration;
-- Operating Orders do not conflict with Technical Specifications;
-- Plant Information Reports confirm there are no violations of
Technical Specification requirements; and
.
i
-- Logs and records are maintained in accordance with Technical
Specifications and the procedures noted above,
c.
The following operating logs and records were reviewed:
-- NOP 2.2-2, Log sheets which consist of Control Room, Part 1
,
and 2, Primary Side Surveillance Form, Secondary Side Surveillance-
,
Form, and Radiation Monitoring System Daily Log;
-- Shift Turnover Sheets;
-- Jumper Log;
!
-- Tag Log; and
-- Control Room Operating Log.
.
d.
No unacceptable conditions were identified in this area.
'
i
l
!
.
I
~
_
__ _
_
__
,
_ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ ,__.
.
.
- -
,
.
5
5.
Licensee Action on IE Bulletins and Circulars
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the following
a.
IE Bulletins:
78-12 and 78-12A Atypical Weld Materials in Reactor Pressure
Vessel Welds. All the information requested by the above Bulletin
was provided to NRC Region I by a contractor of the licensee in a
letter dated June 8, 1979.
the licensee's action on this Bulletin.The inspector had no questions concern
.
78-14 Deterioration of Buna-N Components in Asco Solenoids. This
Tu'TTetin pertains only to boiling water reactors. No action was
required by the licensee.
b.
For the IE Circulars listed below, the inspector verified that the
Circular was received by the licensee management, that a review for
applicability was perfonned, and that appropriaae corrective action
was taken or was scheduled to be taken if the Cfrcular was applicable.
78-16 Limitorque Valve Actuators
.
..
78-17
Inadequate Guard Training / Qualification and Falsified Training
. Records
78-18 UL Fire Test
79-04
Loose LoefIng Nut on Limitorque Valve Operators
,7,9-08 Attempted Extortion-Low Enriched Uranium
79-09 Occurrences of Split or Punctured Regulator
79-10
Pipe Fittings Manufactured from Unacceptable Material
i
79-1? Potential Diesel Generator Problems
79-13
Replacemer.t of Giesel Fire Pump Starting Contactors
i
79-15
Bursting of High Pressure Hose and Malfunction of Relief
Valve "0" Ring in Certain Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus
79-17
Contact Problem in SB-12 Switches on General Electric
Metalclad Circuit Breakers
79-18
Proper Installation of Target Rock Safety Relief Valves
79-19
Loose Locking Devices on Ingersoll-Rand Pumps
79-20
Failure of GTE Sylvania Relay, Type PM Bulletin 7305, Catalog
SU12-ll-AC with a 120V AC Coil
79-23
Motor Starters and Contactors Failed to Operate
79-24
Proper Installation and Calibration of Core Spray Pipe Break
Detection Equipment
'
.
.
,-
+,
,
- , - - -
,
, - - ,
-..,.,e..
,, . - , ,,,----,---n-,-vn---.
,,
.
.
,
6
^ * -
,
.
,
,
6.
Surveillance Observation
The licensee reported to the resident inspector on March 23, 1981,
that the surveillance test perfomed on the High Pressure Safety
Injection (HPSI) Pumps on March 6, :981, had been improperly perfomed.
Surveillance Procedure SUR 5.1-4, "..ot Operational Test", and the
Technical Specifications require that shut-off head HPSI Pump discharge
pressure be greater than 1400 PSIG. The discharge pressure for the test
conducted on March 6 was recorded as 1380 PSIG for both HPSI Pumps. The
fact that the recorded pressure did not meet tne Technical Specification
limit was discovered on March 22, 1981, by a control room operator.
The applicable portions of SUR 5.1-4 were imediately perfomed. Shut-
off head discharge pressure for both HPSI pumps was greater than 1400
PSIG.
The original test results from the March 6 test had been reviewed and
signed by the shift supervisor on March 10, 1981, and reviewed and
signed by a person representing the operations department head on
March 13, 1981. Neither person discovered the error.
Licensee procedures require that surveillance test results be evaluated
by the appl.icable department head or his designated alternate to assure
that test requirements have been satisfied. The fact that the test
results were not properly evaluated and that a person other than the
applicable department head or his designated alternate performed the
department head review constitutes an item of noncompliance (213/81-03-
01).
,
On April 2,1981, the inspector witnessed the HPSI portion of SUR 5.1-4,
which was being conducted in accordance with the normal monthly schedule.
,
The inspector specifically noted that the HPSI pump shut-off head
discharge pressure was greater than the 1400 PSIG minimum required by
the Technical Specifications.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
7.
Operating Events
On April 3,1981, at approximately 9:30 a.m., while operating at full
[
power, one of the two Pressurizer Power Operated Relief Valves (PORV)
and its associated block valve opened spuriously. The valves remained
'
open about three seconds before the operator manually shut the PORV from
i
the main control board.
Plant pressure decreased from 2000 PSIG to
about 1980~PSIG. All other plant conditions remained unchanged. The
i
PORY valve position indication and the relief line acoustic monitor both
'
functioned properly during the event.
The cause of the spurious opening was determined to be a loose connaction
from the pressurizer pressure controller. The connector was reinstalled
i
properly and the PORY was returned to automatic control.
l
l
The inspector had no further questions concerning this event.
!
!
i
i
!
,
=
_.
_
.
. . . .
. . .
- -
_. . _
_ _ _ _
_.
'
'
7
.
8.
Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel, and
review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to
determine that reportability requirements of the Technical Specifications
and Station Administrative and Operating Procedures were fulfilled,
imediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to
. prevent recurrence had been accomplished.
81-01
Failure of a containment air recirculation fan bypass damper to.
-
close. During the monthly fan damper test, the bypass dampers
on one of the four fans did not close. The damper actuation
mechanism was cleaned and the damper was satisfactorily retested.-
Monthly)HPSI surveillance not properly conducted (Details para-
81-02
graph 6 .
81-03 Spurious opening of a pressurizer PORV and associated block
valve (Details paragraph 7).
.
9.
TMI Action Plan Inspection Items.
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's action on.the following NUREG-0737
TMI Action Plan Items which had an implementation date of January 1,1981.
a.
Item I.A.1.3 Shift Manning. The inspector reviewed licensee
procedure ADM 1.1-65, " Operations Department Shift Staffing Requirements",
dated March 27, 1981. This procedure adequately addresses the require-
ments of NUREG-0737 in the area of personnel work schedules.
Licensee action on this item is satisfac' tory.
b.
Item I.C.6. Guidance on Procedures for Verifying Correct
Perfomance of Operating Activities. The following documents were
reviewed in evaluating the licensee's action on this item.
-- NUREG-0737
-- Clarification Letter to All Licensees dated September 5,1980
-- Counsil letter to D.G. Eisenhut dated December 31, 1980
-- QA 1.2-14.2, " Equipment Control", dated May 18, 1979
-- ODI 93, " Station Tagging Instructions" dated February 9, 1981
-- ODI 39, " Verification of Availability of Required Safeguards Equip-
ment when Perfoming Maintenance and Returning to Service", dated
April 26, 1979
In the Counsil to Eisenhut letter of December 31, 1980, the licensee
'
has taken. exception to the NUREG-0737 requirement to provide a second
qualified person to perform verifications of equipment control measures
(tagging) and return-to-service system alignments. The licensee has
stated that a single valve lineup will be perfomed on safety-related
systems returned to service, followed by a system retest to verify
operability. The licensee also stated that the job supervisor, rather
(
than a second operator, will verify correct implementation of equipment
control measures such as tagging of equipment.
..
,
pr-
--
--
=yy-,
,y
- , , - , -
.,,--=--,.y,yar-
wr-
--wwu.
ow"---N
-=ww e -Wwwww ww--e n w re--ee w-W'+ $e
w-
M we t wwr=eNY---"
. -_.._
>
. . - - _
_
- .-.
8
.
.
.
'The licensee's action on this item is not in accordance with the
.
'
requirements of NUREG-0737; however, the inspector reviewed a sample
of licensee procedures and verified that the licensee is meeting his
-
stated commitment.
!
c.
Item II.E.4.2 (6? Containment Isolation Dependability -
Containment Purge Valves.
Technical Specifications at Haddam Neck
Plant prohibit purging with the 42-inch purge valves unless the plant
is in cold shutdown or refueling. These valves are manually operated
r
and are locked in the closed position.
Licensee action on this item is satisfactory.
d.
Item II.K.3 (9) Bulletin and Order Task Force Items -
PID Controllers. This item is not applicable to the Haddam Neck
'
Plant. The installed PORY controller is not a PID controller.
10.
Exit Interview
At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings
j
'
were held with senior licensee manegement personnel to discuss inspection
,
- scope and findings.
.
i
f
i
.
9
>
!
[
{
,
l
.
i
1
.
.--
-
- . , ,
e
, , . - -
, , _ . , . ,_,
,-..,-,1.,-
.-.e,_,
.,
,.g.y
rw,n
ym,
- + , -
,-w