ML20010H004

LER 81-065/03L-0:on 810814,during Administrative Review Discovered That Some Surveillance Testing of Check Valves in Rhr,Core Spray,Hpci & Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Had Not Been Conducted.Caused by Procedural Error.Tests Performed

ML20010H004
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	09/11/1981
From:	W. Verne Childs POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20010H000	List: ML20010G999 ML20010H004
References
LER-81-065-03L, LER-81-65-3L, NUDOCS 8109220776
Download: ML20010H004 (2)

Text

NRC FORM 366 U. S. NUCLEAR REG'.'LATORY COMMISSION

. . t7 lh LICENSEE EVENT REPORT l (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION)

CONTROL BLOCK: l i

l l l l e

lh lo l1l lN lY lJ l A lF l 14 1l@l010l-10 15 l0 LICENSE l010 NUMBER l -l Ol Oi Ol@l 26 26 hl Il LICENSE Il il TYPE 1l@l JO I

57 CA T 5d l@

? 8 9 LICENSEE C00E CON'T Ig , EPC

",, l L j@l 0 l 5 l0 l 0 l0 13 13681369l@l EVENT 0 ;8DATEl 1l 4l 8] 1l@l0l9l1l1l8l1 74 75 AEPORT D ATE 80 l@

7 S Ga 61 CCCAET Nuv6 ER EVENT DESCRIPTION AND PROBABLE CONSECUENCES h lo l2l l During normal shutdown, as part of administrative review, it was discovered that I lo tal l a procedural error resulted in part-of the surveillance required by TS 4.5.A.l.a. 1 No l Io t4l [ 4.5. A.3, 4.5.c.1 and 4.5.E.1.e being missed during 1979. 1980 and 1981.

4 lo isl i signiflCant hazard existed. See attachment for additional details. I l

10161I I

1 o 6 71 i l

l 0 I6 l l 80 SYSTEtt CAUSE CAUSE CCW. VALVF COCE C00E SUSC00E COMPCNENT COCE SUSC00E SUSCOLE 10t91 7 8 lz l zl@ 101@ l z l@ i z I z i z i z i z i z i@ l zi@ L1J @

9 10 11 12 12 14 19 20 CCOURAENCE REPORT REVISICN S E QUE NTI AL

, EVENT YE AR REPCRT NO. CCOE TYPE NC.

g O a(ga Pg

, go 1811i  !-l 1016l5l l/l 10 13 I I tl 1-1 Lal

._ : i 22 22 :4 :s :7 :s :s ao ai 22 O P NT "E HOURS S S IT FC B. LPPLIE MAN ACT RER TA E A ON lXj@lZl@

33 04

]zl@ lzl@

36 06 l0l0l0l0l 3/ 40 l41Y l@ l42N l@ [z_,j@

43 lz19!919l(

44 47 CAUSE CESCRIPTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS h li lo l l P rocedu ral inadequacy was the cause. The reanired reos were ne r fn er-a d netnr en 1 I

[i s i ; l plant startup and applicable surveillance test procedures have been revised-

,, 421 I See attachment for additional details. I I

liis t i 1

l i 141 1 SO 7 8 9

% PCWER CTH ER STATUS :SCO Y DISCOVERY DESCRIPT!GN ST S l

Ii is l l D l@ l0 l010 l@l NA l lAl@lAdministrativeReview ACTIVITY CC TENT LCCATION CF RELEASE RELEASED CF RELE ASE AVCUNT CF ACTIVITY i

I' IS 8I 9LzJ @ LzJ@! m i I n 60 10 11 44 45 7

PERSCNNEL EXPCSURES NUYSER TYPE l

l t i 7 l l 0 l 0 l 0 l@l z "lhlCESCRIPTION NJ

,ER$oNN E L iN;u% ES NuveER cESCRiatioN@ i NA li la 4l 10101 3

O l@l12 11 60 7

LCSS OF CR DAVAGE TO FACILITY ,

TY'E CESCRIPTION l

l1l9) @l10 NA _

7 e s 8109220776 810911 NRc usE ONLY Sa rusticity (;h PDR ADOCK 05000333 7, issuto oESCRietiCN U s PDR f 12101 I N ISL NA I I!lliti'll'ill 63 63 33 ;

I 7 3 9 to V. Verre Childs PHONE II5-3k2'30LO NAVE OF PREPARER g

[,,o ,

POWER AUTHORITY OF-THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 ATTACHMENT TO'LER 81-065/03L-0 Page 1 of 1 An administrative review resulted in the discovery that some surveillance testing of testable check valves in the RHR, Core Spray, HPCI and RCIC Systems had- not been conducted as requi red by Technical Specification

~

sections 4.5. A. I .g (Core Spray) , 4.5. A.3 (RHR) , . 4.5.C.1 (HPCI) , and 4.5.E.1.e (RCIC) during portions of 1979, 1980 and 1981.

-Review of the circumstances indicates that Technical Specification Amendment 40 -(issued on November 9,1978) added the requirement to verify operability of testable check valves whenever the reactor has been in a cold condition for more than forty-eight (48) hours and the valves have not been tested within the last-thirty-one days. Surveillance test procedure changes for implementation of these requirements.were made. However, within a few days of the time these changes were made, additional changes were made. These additional changes incorporated certain ISl' program requirements (relating to pump ond valve testing) into surveillance test F-ST-2S, entitled " Valve Testing - Residual Heat Removal (ISI)", F-ST-3M, entitled " Valve Testing - Core Spray System -

Cold Snutdown Only (ISI)" and F-ST-4H, entitled "HPCI Valve Testing (ISI)".

This series of procedure changes produced two (2) errors which ultimately caused the missed surveillance.

One error omitted testing of the RCIC testable check valve entirely.

Another error prescribed that valve testing be initiated "whenever the-reactor is in the cold condition for more than forty-eight (48) hours and the valves have not been tested within the past ninty-two (92)-days". This ninty-two (92) day interval requirement meets ISI Program requirements but is non-conservative with respset to the thirty-one (31) day Technical Specification requirement.

Tne first error resulted in test of the RCIC check valve being j missed on nine (9) occasions between August 1979 and August 198i. The

, second error resulted in five (5) occasions on~ which the RHR and/or Core Spray and/or. HPCI check ' valve 'was not tested (at the interval required .

~

by} Technical Specification) between . December 1979 and August -1981.

f When the procedure error was discovered on August '14,1981 the reactor was in the cold condition and all of the valves ~ tests required

were completed with satisfactory results prior to startup on' August 16,-

l '1981. In addition, the procedures have been corrected and a review to determine if other conflicts.between Technica11 Specifications and the ISI Program exist did not reveal ~any similar problems.

t r

- . _ . . _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ _.m . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .