ML20107H567
See also: IR 05000219/1974003
Text
._. . _
__
-
.
.
.
_.
_
_.
__
+
.
.
-
.,
.
..
.,
,
~
.
.
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-
,
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS
f?}
,
Y,fr,'i
REGION I
@3
.c
wr
Mr
,
RO Inspection Report No.:
50-219/74-03
Docket No.: -50-219
.
Licensee:
Jersey Central Power & Light Company
License No. : DPR-16
Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road
Priority:
Morristown, New Jersey
07960
Category:
C
'
i
a-
e
,
Location:
Oyster Creek, Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Type of Licensee:
Type of Inspection:
Special, Unannounced
Dates of Inspection:
February 6-11, 1974
bM-
l
Dates of Previous Inspection:
January 21-25, 1974
Reporting Inspector:
ed
-f/24;/74
Edward G. Greenman, Reactor Inspector
Date
Accompanying Inspectors:
OM I 8' /
Id
D. L. L'Aghton, Sehior Reactor
/ D4te
Incpector
Date
.
Other Accompanying Personnel:
Date
i
'
Reviewed By:
MM f D')
b
D. L. Captitbn,/ enior Reactor Inspector
(
/ Dale'
S
Reactor Operations Branch
,
'I
,
9604240165 960213
"
s
- PDR
-
DEKOK95-250
__ ._
_ . - _ _
_ . ._ __.
..
.
.,
i
-
,
'-
.
.
!
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
.
.
Enforcement Action
tid
i
- 1ri
A.
Violations
None
B.-
Safety Items
None
- :
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items
Not inspected
--
'
.
Design Changes
None
Unusual Occurrences
None
Other Significant Findings
,
+4th .
A.
Current
I
1.
Electrical Panel Fire
' i
A flash over occurred on January 21, when attempts to remove
)
leads were initiated at the rear of the 4F Panel (Control room)
and resulted in the loss of recorder read out.
(Report Details,
Paragraphs 2 and 4)
l-
1
2.
Labor Dispute
<
15 maintenance workers were suspended by JCP&L on January 18, 1974
+
following a meeting with plant management. The suspension dur-
ation was for the remainder of the eight hour shift.
(Report
,
o
!
Details, Paragraph 7.a.)
j
\\
3.
Reactor Scram-
j
\\
A scram occurred during startup on-January 20, 1974 due to an
imbalance of the second stage PRV controls which resulted in a
steam flow transient and feedwater. addition.
(Report Details,
'
Paragraph 5.b.)
'
-
<
>
c
'
]
,
.
,
f
..
t
,
>vr-~-
w
n
m
-
4
g
,
,e
e
- - ,
m
-
_
_ _ _ _ . _
. . - .
. . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _
__ . _ .
_
. . _ _ _
L
l
'
-
,
l-
,
.
,.
.
I
<
.
t
I
-2-
p
i-
.,
B.
Status of'Previously Reported Unresolved Items
,
Not inspected
p
.
y
Management Interview
j;k .
M
-
An exit interview was conducted on February 11, with Mr. D. A. Ross,
,
I
Manager, Nuclear Generating Stations, Mr..J. T. Carroll, Station
Superintendent, and Mr. D. Reeves, Chief Engineer. Messrs..Sullivan,
j
Swift, Riggle. Growney and Skalsky were also in attendance for JCP&L.
'
Items discussed are summarized below:
A.
General
r
The' inspector summarized the scope of the special inspection, as
restricted to a review of circumstances surrounding the reactor
startup of January 20, 1974, a review of surveillance records
concerning environmental areas and off-site instrumentation, and
.'
scheduled on shift; observations of routine plant operations. Licen-
see representatives were informed that within the scope of the
inspection, no violations or safety items were identified.
B.-
Observations of Plant Operations
,
The inspector stated that in general, plant operations appeared
,
smooth.
Specific comments were as follows:
,
%=
Plant appearance appeared to be. improving and substantial
1.
painting and housekeeping work was noted in progress.
2.
Smoking and cigarette butts required attention. The. inspector.
stated that the 4F panel in the control room was not secured,
-
and cigarette butts were observed near electrical' cables. The
inspector further stated that this was unacceptable.-
,
3.
Required reading files and standing orders should be reviewed,
specifically to remove obsolete material and to clearly define
J
the authority of standing orders in administrative procedures.
A licensee representative concurred with the inspectors state-
ments.
(Report Details, Paragraph 7.b.)
,
10.
Instrument Panel-Problem
The inspector stated-that his review of circumstances surrounding
the instrument panel fire which. occurred January 21, 1974; indicated
a procedural deficiency which required resolution. :The inspector
further steted his understanding based on previous discussions with
cognizant licensee representatives that procedure 103.12 Revision 1
dated 1/15/74 would be revised to clearly describe shift turnover
e
.
.
.
- . .
.
..
.-
-
.
.
. ..
A
f
D
_3
requirements. including definition of areas of maintenance involvi'ng
i
instrumentation that could affect plant operation.
g ., ..v
..
Rn;,..'s
A licensee representative concurred with the inspector's under-
standing. '(Report Details, Paragraph 4)
.*
f
e se 'a
,4
c?
g
,
'5
,
i
i
i
ty;;
a ..
. 5g
.
.
9
. %g
4
g
, $ ?.
f.,
.
l
I
1
- . -- - - - - - .
.
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
.
..
D. A. Ross, Manager, Nuclear Generating Stations
J. T. Carroll, Station Superintendent
- '
D. L. Reeves, Chief Engineer
J. L. Sullivan, Operations Engineer
J. P. Maloney, Operations Supervisor
R. F. Swift, Maintenance Engineer
E. I. Riggle, Maintenance Supervisor
E. J. Growney, Technical Engineer
K. O. Fickeissen, Technical Supervisor
R. L. Stoudnour, Staff Engineer
E. D. Skalsky, Radiation Protection Supervisor
F.11. Kossatz, Mechanical Maintenance Foreman - Nuclear
.-
F. A. Anderson, Mechanical Maintenance Foreman - Nuclear
,
R. Keating, Mechanical Maintenance
T. L. Johnson, Instrument and Electrical Foreman - Nuclear
R. McKeon, Shift Foreman
B. J. Cooper, Shift Foreman
N. M. Cole, Shift Foreman
J. Molnar, Shift Foreman
D. VanBarCom, Control Room Operator
C. Silvers, Control Room Operator
J. Young, Shift Foreman
C. Dekker, Control Room Operator
gggg
2.
Operations
On January 20, 1974, the reactor was critical, following a shutdown
which began January 13, 1974.* At 7:28 P.M. a reactor scram
occurred due to high flux from coldwater injection, when the second
stage reheat valve opened.
Feedwater flow was reduced and subse-
The reactor was
quent level shrink and injection caused the scram.
again critical at 10:50 P.M., and in the run mode at 10:00 A.M.
January 21, 1974. At approximately 4:00 P.M. January 21st, removal
of leads from the LPRM downscale inhibit circuit caused a flashover
in the rear of Panel 4F and tripped a breaker which caused a loss of
power to the 4F recorders.
Power was reduced to monitor instrumentation
response and the breaker was reset. On January 22, 1974 power was
again redue. d to less than 50% when the torus atmosphere was not
less than Ehk as required by the Technical Specifications, due to
an inadequate N2 supply.*
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-01 dated February 7, 1974
.
,
.
.
-5-
3.
Logs and Records
The following logs and records were reviewed without comment except
4
as noted within this report.
'M
a.
Shift Supervisors Log, January 16-24, 1974.
'
b.
Station Log Book - January 16-24, 1974.
c.
Reactor Pressure and Turbine Pressure Charts - January 20-23, 1974.
d.
Maintenance History Reports - January 14-23, 1974.
e.
Electrical Log - January 16-25, 1974.
. . .
f.
Instrument Log - January 17-25, 1974.
g.
Required Reading Files (Control Room Copy) .
h.
Standing Orders (Control Room Copy).
i.
Electrical Maintenance History Reports December 30, 1973 -
January 31, 1974.
,
j.
IRM and APRM Channel Recorder Charts - January 18-24, 1974.
UNA3
k.
Bridge Temperature Charts - January 18-23, 1974
1.
Discharge Canal Temperature Charts - January 18-23, 1974.
m.
Environmental Surveillance Records - October 22 - December 19, 1973.
'
4.
Reactivity Control and Core Physics
a.
APRM Down Scale Rod Block Inhibit
f
The licensee had disabled the downscale inhibit block leads
previously installed. Lead removal was conducted in accordance
vith a PORC approved procedure charge request dated January 18,
1974.
This change was reviewed by the inspector. The instru-
ment log indicated that on January 21, 1974 while verifying
'
the leads to be removed, the lead on the involved terminal
board lug (Rear 4F panel) was touched and a loose wire strand
contacted ground, which resulted in a trip of the power feed
breaker in instrument panel 4.
(Interrupting power to nuclear
instrumentation recorders.)
Continuity checks and resistance
to ground were performed and the breaker and circuit was re-
energized.
The inspector visually examined the panel and
-
s
.
,
-6-
observed a small amount of charring and burned lead wires.
Discussion with personnel involved indicated that one operator
heard a " cracking noise" and observed a " flash".
Log records
and charts reviewed indicated that recirculation flow was
reduced to observe instrument response. A licensee represen-
a
Ml
tative stated that all instruments functioned normally during
'
the interval of the occurrence. Plant Records indicated no
scram occurred. Discussion indicated that one licensee repre-
sentative at the control panel was unaware that instrumentation
technicians were performing work. This occurrence happened
during a shift change. The inspector discussed requirements
of the Shif t Turnover Procedure with a licensee representative.
Inclusion of briefing concerning definition of maintenance
activities which could affect plant operation was discussed
at the exit interview. Additionally, the licensee issued a
memorandum during the inspection to operations personnel, to
insure shift changes are performed with minimal confusion and
to complete or defer work and surveillance testing until on-
coming shift personnel have assumed responsibilities.
5.
Auxiliary Systems
a.
Isolation Condensers
"B" Condenser Valve V-14-32
During valve operability testing on January 18, 1974, V-14-32
1
2A3Q4
was determined to be noisy during operation. The valve was
repacked and did not appear to open fully during testing. The
valve was being de-energized from the torque switch rather than
from the limit switch. After disassembly, the stem was found
to be bent, and was subsequently straightened and the valve
reassembled and tested on January 20th. According to licensee
representatives, electricians and operators assisted with the
bulk of this work due to the unavailability of sufficient
maintenance personnel,
b.
Second Stage Reheater PRV Control
On January 20, 1974 a reactor scram occurred from IRM High Flux,
when control of the PRV's was switched without balancing the
system at the " manual loading station". With the manual regul-
ator set at zero psig and the automatic signal at 30 psig, and
the transfer to " auto" was made, both PRV's fully open creating
a steam flow transient requiring feedwater addition. Records
indicated that an IRM trip occurred at greater than 120% on
Range 9.
Reactor pressure was about 350 psig and turbine vacuum
was less than 20"Hg at the time of the scram. Discussion with
involved personnel indicated that switching was performed by a
,
f
.
i
.
l'
-7-
licensed senior operator. Records reviewed indicated no
other scrams occurred during the startup beginning January 20,
1974.
.
6.
Environment
.
$f'
" -
The following surveillance records for the periods as indicated
were reviewed against requirements of the Technical Specifications,
Table B.II.1.
a.
Radiogas Surveys (Film Badge) - December 12, 1973 - January 15, 1974
December results for 20 samples indicated zero Mrad readings.
January results were incomplete. Licensee records indicated that
one (1) of 20 badges was missing at the collection. Discussion
indicated that occasionally, a badge could not be found..
4
b.
Airborne Particulate Samples - October 22, 1973 - December 19, 1973
Highest readings observed were at Station I for samples collected
3
December 19, 1973 at (4.2
0.7) x 10-2 pCi/m ,
c.
Rainwater Samples * - December 19, 1973
Five (5) 1000 mg samples were collected. Highest readings were
0.5
0.1 nC1/m
44M
d.
Vegetation Samples * - November 19 - December 14, 1974
The licensee counts gross S each four (4) weeks. The highest
reading (wet weight) was reported as 8.0 1 1.4 pCi/ gram.
e.
Soil Samples * - November 20 - December 19, 1973
The highest reading observed was reported as 5.9
1 pCi/ gram.
i
f.
Well Water * - October 22 - December 19, 1973
The licensee procures four and 12 week samples. All data
indicated values below preoperational information.
g.
Surface Water * - November 20 - December 18, 1973
Five samples were taken, three saltwater and three freshwater
samples.
The December data indicated a higher gross a (suspended)
1.e. 0.6 1 0.1 pCi/ liter. Normal readings were about 0.1 pC1/ liter.
,
'
One gross 8 (suspended) sample indicated slightly higher than nor-
mal, i.e. 7.9
1.3 pci/ liter. Normal readings were about 1.3 -
3.7 pCi/ liter.
.
o
- Results of January samples had not been received by the conclusion
of this inspection.
j
. - -
-
-
.
,
.hl
r
r
-
,
'
.
-8-
,
h.
Effluent Temperatures
The: inspector reviewed bridge temperature and discharge canal
g,;
temperature' charts for the period January 18-24, 1974. Tem-
fio
perature fluctuations wera caused during this interval by a
l'IU
reactor scram, a load reduction and pump actions. One unaccount-
able temperature rise on January 19th was observed.
7.
Miscellaneous
j
.
a.
Labor Problem
Discussion with cognizant licensee representatives indicated
that a dispute occurred with respect to maintenance worker. lunch
periods on January'13, 1974.
On this date according to _ licensee
representatives, some personnel left'for an unauthorized lunch
'
.
break.
As a result, on January 18, 1974, following a. meeting
with plant management, 15 maintenance personnel were suspended
for the remainderlof an eight (8) hour shift. Discussion with
t
maintenance foreman and a workman also indicated that no walk-
outs occurred with the exception of the unauthorized lunch break-
on January 13.
b.
Observation of Shift Operations
During the course of the inspection, the inspectors partici-
WWrf -
pated in on-shift coverage and accompanied shift foreman on
tours of the reactor. The following observations,and deficien -
,
cies which required resolution were discussed at the exit interview.
!
(1) Housekeeping
The licensee's program of repainting and cleaning of the
-
facility is continuing and improvements were noted.
Some
areas toured were in disarray and were attributed to the
cleanup in progress. Painting work is being completed by
outside contractor. The inspectors noted that the 4F panel
front cover at the control console had been removed and
observed cigarette " butts" near electrical cables. Licensee
i
representatives were advised that this was unacceptable.
(2) Required Reading Files
Review of control room files indicated that obsolete material
was maintained in addition to current items, i.e. outdated
radio transmitter license. The current-licensee was conspic-
uously posted in the control room. The inspector discussed
review and updating of these files with n' licensee representative.
.
9
h
- - _ . a
. . _ _.. . _
. _ .
,
. ;
.
,
~
.-
-
.
.
,
,
-9-
i
!
(3) Standing Orders
)
'
{
The inspector discussed operator interpretation of the
, ,,
y}'l
status and authority of facility.atanding orders, with
f,.
.j .
operations personnel contacted during on-shift observations.
The inspector noted that this area is not clearly defined
in the Oyster Creek facility procedures. A licensee rep-
.l
resentative stated that this area would be resolved..
. . .
s
'h
9
. . ,
t
..
4