ML20050M494
| ML20050M494 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1982 |
| From: | Jackiw I, Ring M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20050M169 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-454-82-02, 50-454-82-2, NUDOCS 8204140311 | |
| Download: ML20050M494 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000454/1982002
Text
._._ _ - . -
.-
.__
__
_
_ ___
__
__
i
a
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
,
Report No. 50-454/82-02
,
Docket No. 50-454
License No. CPPR-130
I
Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company
Post Office Box 767
Chicago, IL 60690
-
Facility Name: Byron Station, Unit 1
Inspection At: Byron Site, Byron, IL
Inspection Conducted: January 25-27, 29 and February 2, 3, 16-19, 1982
,
~ ~Y!} t $ ~
I/Y!6'2
Inspector:
M. A. R g
J2Macb
'g/,o/p""
j
Approved By:
,T'.' N. Jlickiw, Chief
/
' Test Program Section
Inspection Summary
Inspection on January 25-27, 29, and February 2, 3,
16-19, 1982 (Report No.
50-454/82-02(DETP))
Areas Inspected: Routine announced inspection to review preoperational
test procedures, witness the performance of preoperational testing, review
the evaluation of preoperational test results and review previous open
items. The inspection involved 65 inspector-hours onsite and 33 inspec-
,
!
tor-hours in office by one NRC inspector including 0 inspector-hours onsite
during off shifts.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, two items of noncompliance were
!
identified in one area (failure to adequately specify system status -
Paragraph 4b(1) and failure to provide adequate measures for the care and
preservation of safety-related equipment - Paragraph 4b(2)).
I
!
l
l
8204140311 820330
DR ADOCK 05000454
,
-.
-
.- - -.-.
- , _ - .
. - - - - - _ - - - - - - . . - . - -
- - - -
- = - . , - - -
_
_
.
.
-
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
- C. Tomashek, Byron Startup Group
- R. Ward, Assistant Superintendent, Administration and Support
- D.
St. Clair, Tech Staff Supervisor
- R.
Klingler, QC Supervisor, Project Construction
- G.
Sorensen, Construction Superintendent
- R.
Querio, Station Superintendent
- L.
Sues, Assistant Superintendent, Maintenance
- R. Tuetken, Assistant Construction Superintendent
- J.
Binder, Project Electric Supervisor
- F. Willich, Quality Assurance
- A.
Jaras, Project 0AD Supervisor
- F.
Hornbeak, Assistant Technical Staff Supervisor - Startup
- A.
Chomacke, Assistant Technical Staff Supervisor
R. Grams, Master Instrument Mechanic
B. Milner, Technical Staff
W. Walter, Technical Staff
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previouc Inspection Findings
i
a.
(Closed) Noncompliance (454/81-11-01): The item dealt with an
inadequate review of a Startup Manual Change. The inspector
reviewed the specific corrective action and subsequent revisions
5 and 6 to the Startup Manual and considers the item acceptable.
b.
(Closed) Noncompliance (454/81-11-02): The item consisted of
three parts, two of which dealt with verifying instrument cali-
bration while the third dealt with exceeding a test pressure
band. The inspector reviewed the corrective actions outlined
by the licensee response including a review of Byron Instrument
Procedures 2000-004, Frequency of In-Plant Instrument Calibration
and 2000-003, Frequency of Calibration of In-Plant Instrumentation
- FSAR Requirements.
In addition, the inspector reviewed test
procedures 2.67.10, Residual Heat Removal and 2.22.10, Diesel
Generator as examples of corrective action and considers the item
acceptable.
l
3.
Preoperational Test Procedure Review
The inspector reviewed test procedures 2.67.10, Residual Heat Removal,
2.73.11, Safety Injection Accumulator System, 2.24.10, Diesel Fuel Oil
and 2.22.10, Diesel Generator against the FSAR and Regulatory Guide 1.68.
The following problem areas were noted:
i
2
i
l
..
-.
.--
.
. _ - .
-_ .
,- .
--
. - . - . -
--
--
--
-
_
.
.
a.
Other than those values addressed as acceptance criteria in
the FSAR, the test procedures were not providing acceptance
values and tolerance ranges for data such as alarms and trip
points being checked by the test.
The inspector pointed out
4
to the licensee that this practice may be preventing test
engineers from recognizing and documenting deficient conditions
as they occur during the performance of the test.
The licensee
acknowledged the potential problem and proposed providing expected
values and tolerance ranges for all safety related system alarms
and trip points. Any observed data falling outside these bounds
,
would then be documented and resolved via the test procedure
'
evaluation process or as a deficiency. This is an open item
-
(454/82-02-01) pending the licensee formally documenting the pro-
posed method for handling the " secondary" class of acceptance
,
values and inspector review of the implementation.
b.
The Diesel Generator Test, 2.22.10 was also reviewed against
Regulatory Guides 1.108 Revision 1, dated February 1977,
and 1.9 Revision 0, dated March 10, 1971 and IEEE Std 387-1972.
NUREG/CR-0660, Enhancement of On-site Emergency Diesel Generator
Reliability, was also utilized in the review. The inspector
discussed several comments with the licensee primarily dealing
with where and how the regulatory positions of the above
standards were satisfied. This is an open item (454/82-02-02)
<
pending further discussion with the licensee.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Preoperational Test Witnessing
a.
The inspector witnessed portions of the performance of tests 2.67.10 Residual Heat Removal and 2.22.10 Diesel Generator.
The inspector verified the following aspects of the test
performance:
(1) Latest revision and chcnges incorporated into procedure
!
(2) Minimum crew requirements satisfied
(3) Test preprequisites satisfied
l
l
(4) Necessary briefings conducted
j
(5) Test equipment properly installed
(6)
Instrumentation calibrated and inservice
(7) Personnel possessed adequate knowledge of the system and
the test procedure
,
(8) Generally satisfactory conduct of test
l
l
3
l
!
-. -
-.
_ - _ _
.
-
- ._ ,
.
-
..
--
_
'
.
b.
While observing the performance of the above tests, the inspector
noted the following problem areas:
(1)
In the RHR and SI systems the instruments listed below were
found to not be " blue taped" indicating turnover for preoper-
ational test even though the System Status Notice in the
Control Room showed that the instruments were included in
the turnover. This observation was made on January 26, 1982.
(a) RHR flow switch indicator IFIS0610
(b) RHR flow transmitter 1FT0618
(c) RHR pressure transmitter IPT-614
(d) RHR suction pressure gauge 1PIO601
(e) RHR flow switch 1FS0611
(f) RHR suction pressure gauge 1PIO602
(g) SI pump 1A discharge pressure gauge 1PISIO44
In addition, the inspector observed blue tape of similar color
wrapped around piping to many instruments in the same panels.
During discussion with one of the Quality Assurance personnel,
the inspector was informed that this tape was used by the 11-
censee's instrument contractor, Power-Azco-Pope, as an aid in
establishing separation for ESF and RPS instrumentation and was
described in an internal memo, dated November 2, 1981, entitled,
" Color Codes for Instrument Pipes".
The operations and tech staff
personnel, including management, indicated that they were unaware
of the existence of this second use of colored tape. Use of the
instrument contractor's colored tape system served to further
confuse the determination of the test inspection status of the
system instruments. Failure to adequately establish and implement
measures to indicate the status of inspections and tests performed
upon items of the power plant is considered to be a violation of
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XIV and the Byron Station Startup
Manual paragraphs 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 and is considered to be an item
of noncompliance (454/82-02-03).
(2) The inspector observed the following conditions potentially
damaging to safety related equipment:
(a) Level 346 - 2 in. x 12 in x 10 ft. board - laying across
instrument lines to panel 1PL93J.
(b) Level 346 - 4 ft. x 6 ft. plywood piece leaning against
instrument panel.
4
- .-
(c) Level 346 - water dripping on IA containment spray
pump (drain plugged on 364 level).
(d) Area of RHR pump 1A - cubicle cooler being used as
storage platform or trashcan (rags, a valve, many
fittings, couple of boards on top), red air hose
draped around RH pump suction pressure, isolation
valve IRH8739A.
(e) Area of RHR Pump 1B - same problem as with 1A cubicle
cooler, 2 in. x 12 in. board wedged in behind suction
pressure instrument line.
(f)
In RHR Heat exchanger 1B room (a) 2 in. x 4 in. staging
resting on top of temperature instrument ITI-609 (b) one
saw blade, several cigarettes, piece of wood, much dirt
and grit, one blue taped valve hand wheel resting in
instrument air tray to air operated valve RH 607 (c)
half-crushed air tubing to air operated valve RH 607
(d) hi point vent line open to room (no cap or cover).
(g)
In RHR heat exchanger 1A room (a) high point vent
valve handwheel off (lying on staging); nut missing
(b) vent line open to room (i.e., no cap or dust cover).
(h)
In SI pump A room (a) 2 wooden signs, 1 2 in. x 4 in.
board, couple of pieces of cardboard, 1 in. nut lying
on top of pump motor (b) general housekeeping in room
poor - conduit, tubing, boards, cardboard, rags strewn
about room, tape, cigarettes, loose nut and bolts and
paper all over.
(1) Area of instrument manifold for 1P1-S1-044 - (SI Pump
1A Discharge Pressure) - step ladder chained to instru-
ment piping, several coats hung on valves and instru-
l
ments, roll of cable draped over the manifold.
(j) Temperature instrument - 1 TICS 040 - missing glass face
(in CS pump 1B room).
(k)
In DG-1A room - on top of diesel generator control panel
Coke cans, bag of potato chips, 4 ft. x 4 ft.
piece of cardboard, loose tape, several loose connectors,
aluminum foil, loose scraps of wire, cigarette butts, dust,
dirt grit.
(1) Step ladder chained to same instrument piping as in item 9.
l
(m)
1/8" piece of boilerplate approximately 2 1/2 ft. x 2 1/2 ft.
l
1eaning against instrument isolation valve for refueling
l
water purification pump OA discharge pressure gauge.
l
t
l
l
!
5
-
_
-
_ .-.
_.
-_
.
. - - - -
, , - -
., O
(n) Welding lead run around each of the air gauges on air
operated valve RHR 607.
(o) In DG -1B room - chunks of debris (probably concrete or
insulation) behind screens on both air dryers.
Similar problems were identified in NRC Inspection Report No.
50-454/81-12-01 and followup Reports No. 50-454/81-18,
50-455/81-14, 50-454/82-03 and 50-455/82-02. The licensee
does not have an adequate program to ensure proper care and
preservation of safety related equipment as shown by the fact
that the same problems still exist to the same degree. Lack
of a program to ensure proper care and preservation of safety
related equipment as required by ANSI N45.2.2 is inconsistent
with the QA Manual and with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion
XIII and is considered to be an item of noncompliance
(454/82-02-04).
5.
Preoperational Test Results Evaluation
The inspector commenced review of the results of preoperational test
2.73.11 Safety Injection Accumulators System and the review is still
in progress.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph
1) on February 19, 1982. The inspector summarized the scope and
findings of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged the statements
made by the inspector with respect to the open items and the items
of noncompliance (Paragraphs 4.b.1 and 2).
6