ML20245D985
| ML20245D985 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Hatch, Mcguire, Palo Verde, Catawba, Saint Lucie, Brunswick, Surry, North Anna, Turkey Point, Vermont Yankee, Crystal River, Diablo Canyon, Vogtle, Farley, San Onofre, Bellefonte, McGuire, 05000000, Shoreham, Trojan |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1989 |
| From: | Liner R SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY |
| To: | Polk H NRC |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-87-029, CON-NRC-3-87-29 NUDOCS 8906270292 | |
| Download: ML20245D985 (30) | |
Text
.
e a
"4
[., _.
?
' Science Applications international Corporation An Emplosee Owned Company
_l June 22, 1989 Mr.' Harold Polk, Project Officer
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
Contract NRC-03-87-029, Task Order No. 037,
" Development of Performance Evaluation Data," Subtask 01
Dear Mr. Polk:
'This letter _ transmits 21 inspection report executive summaries, as listed below:
- 5 06/88-28,50-i61/88-29,50-362/88-31 10'245/88-25
'50-250/89-11,y50- 51/89-11
- 50-271/88-20 40-275/89-02,50 23/89-02 0-280/89-05,IO-281/89-05 50-280/89-06,50-281/89-06 0-302/89-03 10-321/89-03,40-366/89-03 4 0-322/88-11
50-325/89-02,10-324/89-02
'50-335/89-05,50-T89/89-05 "50-338/89-06,50~339/89-06
$0-344/88-50 50-348/89-06,10-364/89-06 40-369/89-01,40-370/89-01 413/89-06,*50-414/89-06
'50-424/89-07,40-425/89-10
- 50-438/88-06,10-439/88.06 50-413/89-05,.50-414/89-05 50 4 28/88-41, 50 4 29/88-40, 40-530/88-39 A total of 290 summaries have been delivered to date under Task Order 037.
In addition to preparing the enclosed summaries, we have also prepared' individual quality evaluations of the inspection reports from which these summaries were written. The results of the quality evaluations will be presented in our next monthly summary report (Reporting Requirement 3),
if not already included in monthly summary reports submitted.to date. Any inspection reports listed above not already returned to you will be returned whon we deliver the next monthly summary report.
Please contact the task manager, Martin Ebert, at (301) 428-7645 if you have any questions or problems concerning this submittal.
Sincerely, Robert T. Liner, r.
. Project Manager M
Enclosure i
cc: Jake Wechselberger, 2 copies of enclosure Bill Bateman, without enclosure Joyce Fields, without enclosure 1710 Goodridge Drive, P.O. Box 1303, McLean, Virginia 22102 (703) 821 4300 orw SAIC offocos Alt >uoveraue. Boaron. Cokwado Stmngs. Devron, Huntsume. Las % gar. Los Angeles, Ook Rodpe. Orlanda Palo alta San Omgo. Sentre. and Yucson
- 8906270292 890622
- PDR ADOOK 05000206 Q
i L.
]
+
{
h INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Sen Onofro 1,2,3 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8903080022 INSPECTION DATES:
50-206/88-28 REPORT DATE:
11/18/88-01/07/89 50-361/88-29 02/16/89 01/12/89-01/12/89 50-362/88-31
-INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
L INSPECTION SCOPE:
Operational safety verification;-radiological protection; security; surveillance; maintenance; refueling; LERs; miscellaneous.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Failure to use the proper revision of a procedure. (Level IV).
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Plant-Operations During the review of the licensee actions to monitor core activity during the Unit I refueling outage, the inspector noted that the TS requirements for reactivity monitoring were incorrect or weak. The licensee concurred that the TS were in need of improvement.
During a walkdown of-Unit 2 electrical equipment, the inspector noted that a switch was mispositioned. It was determined that the switch had not been properly returned to the required position by a plant operator following post-maintenance return of the equipment to operation.
Maintenance / Surveillance The inspector reviewed the controls exercised by plant operators and chemistry personnel during a period when both channels of source range nuclear instruments were taken out of service for modification. One observation was that the tracking form (LC0AR) which was initiated when the channels were placed out of service, was not properly revised following their return to service. The other observation was that the chemistry procedure used to sample the reactor coolant, was not implemented correctly, because the technician failed to obtain the proper procedure revision. The latter was considered a violation.
On 1/6/89, Unit 3 tripped on low steam generator level. Prior to the trip a non 1-E uninterruptible power supply inverter had developed an electrical fault. Upon investigation, it was determined that a temporary jumper used in a modification had not been removed. The inspector concluded that although it appeared unlikely that the jumper caused the fault, it did compromise the ability of the plant operators
w ce a
+
InspectionReportNumber(s):
50-206/88-28' Page 2 of 2 50-361/88-29 50-362/88-31 to detect and correct the cause of the inverter fault before the inverter - was lost. This was considered an Open Item.
Security On 11/26/88, plant operators observed that the fire deluge system for the Unit _2 RC pump had spuriously activated. It was later determined that the-incident involved unauthorized tampering with the system's actuation switch. In reviewing the event the inspectors raised the following concerns:
.o Licensee management appeared to underreact to the event in that they did not identify.the tampering until four days after the' event.
o Following the' identification of plant tampering, station management was slow in implementing a physical search to determine whether additional tampering activity had taken place.
-_-.N__.-._-_.--.___..--
.-._N...
L, r-1 INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
q Millstone I
'(DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8902070145 a
INSPECTION DATES:
50-245/88-25 REPORT DATE:
J 11/29/88-01/09/89' 02/02/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
3 I
INSPECTION SCOPE:
{
l Plant operations; security; licensed operator requalification j
examinations; surveillance; n: miscellaneous.
j i
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Plant Operations A concern was identified during reactor operator licensing examinations, in that some candidates appeared to rely heavily on memory for E0P implementation rather than using the actual procedures.
A concern was also raised over two digital printers which were so loud that they inhibited shift communications. The relocation or soundproofing of the printers was identified as an Unresolved Item.
Radiological Controls An Unresolved Item regarding high radiation area door control was closed based on the corrective actions taken by the licensee. However, on 11/19, the licensee discovered another incident of an open high radiation area door. The incident was not reported in an LER, and was determined to be an Unresolved Item.
Maintenance / Surveillance Minor deficiencies were identified in the maintenance procedures for station batteries. This was considered an Unresolved Item.
Security On 1/5/89, a security shift supervisor discovered a security guard asleep at his post. The guard had been posted as compensation for a security weakness identified in June, 1988. Four incidents regarding guards asleep at their posts have been identified over the past two years.
I
- j, g.7 - ~
.a p, a, 3.
.t P
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE SUNNARY PLANT NAMEi~.
' INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Turkey Point 3,4 -
,(DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904120122 F
' INSPECTION DATES:
50-250/89 REPORT DATE:
02/27/89-03/03/89
'50-251/89-11
_03/29/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, announced.
.-INSPECTION SCOPE:
~
Local leak rate. testing; verification of containment' integrity.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No-violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
. FINDINGS RELATED-70.SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Maintenance / Surveillance
. The inspector identified several containment isolation valves that were tested in a direction opposite to accident pressure. This may be contrary to 10 CFR 50, Appendix J requirements. The matter was identified as an Unresolved Item.
L The: inspectors noted.that the local leak rate test procedure did not provide the. level of. detail necessary to verify and ensure that adequate penetration. draining would be accomplished for all leakage-
~
-tests. :The licensee committed to incorporate draining instructions in the procedure. This was considered an Inspector Follow-Up Item.
- Safety Assessment / Quality Verification The licensee was responsive to NRC initiatives and involved in assuring quality as evidenced by their interest in taking prompt and appropriate corrective action on the inspector.'s findings.
i i
f i-
.4,
g
+
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:-
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
. Vermont Yankee (DOCKET NO.'/ SEQUENCE NO.)
8902020134 INSPECTION DATES:
50-271/88-20 REPORT DATE:
- 11/15/88-01/03/89 01/24/89 INSPECTION' TYPE
Routine, resident.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Operational safety verification; security; maintenance; surveillance; radiological controls; LERs.
SUMMARV 0F VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified by the inspectors. A -
. licensee. identified violation.regarding a failure to have an intact vital fire barrier penetration seal or a continuous fire watch, was not cited per 10 CFR 2, Appendix C.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
I Plant Operations On 12/14/88, the licensee discovered that the penetration seals between the reactor and turbine buildings for the main steam lines and feedwater lines did not meet the required three-hour fire barrier i
rating. This was a licensee identified violation.
Radiological Controls The transfer of high-activity vacuum filters from the spent fuel pool to a ~ shipping container was a well planned and rehearsed evolution.
Licensee ingenuity in incorporating ALARA principles in the procedure resulted in lower than projected personnel exposure. Strong inter-departmental coordination and communication were evident.
Maintenance / Surveillance Weaknesses were identified in the procedure for the surveillance of fire barrier penetration seals: non-definitive inspection acceptance criteria, no specific identification of penetrations to be inspected, and lack of formal training for inspecting personnel. These were identified as an Unresolved Item.
Engineering / Technical Support The Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) 1A experienced extended periods of unavailability from 11/27 to 12/9 due to various component failures.
The UPS continues generally to exhibit poor reliability for a safety I
m..
- F k
i Inspection Report Number (s):
50-271/88-20 Page 2 of 2 fp
[.
related system. Continuing licensee efforts to improve the reliability of these power supplies is needed.
On 11/30/88, a' core spray system MOV failed to operate correctly and was declared inoperable. The failure mechanism of the valve was nearly
. identical to an RHR system valve failure on 12/15/87. The licensee committed to provide a failure mechanism analysis for the vi.1ve failure and long term corrective action. This was considered an Unresolved Item.
Safety Assessment / Quality Verification The additional deficiencies noted in the licensee's fire protection program demonstrate that a continuing problem exists in this area. The quantity and diversity of the inadequacies identified over the past several months indicate weaknesses in the overall implementation of the program and weak management oversight in this area.
Although a concern had been raised by the NRC, the licensee' failed to
' develop and attain approval from the Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) for a' cold weather preparations procedure prior to the onset of the winter season. This was considered an isolated instance of lack of responsiveness to NRC concerns.
l
I L1..
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION N0.:
Diablo Canyon I,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8903280248
)
INSPECTION DATES:
50-275/89-02 REPORT DATE:
01/30/89-02/02/89 50-323/89-02 03/I3/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Special, announced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS)_ system.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
The licensee has installed the ATWS mitigation system actuation circuitry adequately to meet the requirements of the 10 CFR 50.62. In general, the physical arrangement and installation were done in accordance with the NRC Safety Evaluation Report. Three specific items of concern were identified as Inspector Follow-Up Items:
o Adequacy of the annunciation associated with the system..
o Adequacy of the separation of wires within the system's electrical cabinet.
o Verification of the first calibration of the system.
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
I I
E wn...
J (L.
.p g
INSPECTION REPORT EX'CUTIVE
SUMMARY
q E
PLANT NAME:.
INSPECTION. REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION N0.:
Surry 1,2.
(DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904040002
- INSPECTION DATES
50-280/89-05 REPORT DATE:
f'
-02/06/89-02/10/69-50-281/89-05 03/16/89-
' INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine,_ announced.
. INSPECTION SCOPE:-
Mpe support base plate designs using expansion anchor bolts (IEB.
79-02); seismic.. analysis for as-built safety related piping (IEB 79-14); fastener testing-(Bulletin 87-02); thermal: stress in piping connected to reactor coolant systems (Bulletin 88-08); pressurizer surge line thermal, stratification (Bulletin 88-11).
1SUMMAEf;0F VIOLATIONS: o No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
- Maintenance / Surveillance.
In: reviewing;the licensee's response to NRC Bulletin 87-02, the inspector noted.that certain. non safety, related fasteners'had not been submitted for testing as required by the Bulletin. It was requested that the licensee's'QA department investigate the reasons. This was identified as an' Unresolved Item.
In reviewing the licensee's response to NRC Bulletin 88-08, the
.nspector observed discrepancies with the installation of thermocouple 4
attached to the safety injection and pressurizer surge piping. The thermocouple were found to be..not properly oriented. The corrective action and the investigation as to the reason for the mis-orientation of the thermocouple were defined as Unresolved Items.
Safety' Assessment / Quality' Verification Tha disorientation of the thermocouple reflects a weakness involving QC. inspection, design and installation methods.
m_.________._____.-
t INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Surry 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE N0.)
8904180340 INSPECTION DATES:
50-280/89-06 REPORT DATE:
01/29/89-03/04/89 50-281/89-05 04/03/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Plant operations; maintenance; surveillance; LERs; modifications.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Failure to provide adequate procedure for testing safety related systems. (Not cited per enforcement policy.).
Failure to take prompt corrective action on potential wetting of safety related components. (Potential enforcement action).
Failure to take corrective action on removing potentially unqualified j
parts from the site supply system. (Potential enforcement action.).
~
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Maintenance / Surveillance On 2/8/89, the licensee reported, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72, a spurious safety injection at Unit 1 during testing. Initial evaluation of the event concluded that the test procedure was inadequate. The procedure was revised. The violation was not cited per Section V of the NRC Enforcement Policy.
On 2/4/89, a 4160 V breaker failed to close during electrical realignments to support special testing. It was determined that the mechanical portion of the breaker was not working properly. A licensee commitment to refurbish all safety related 4160 V breakers prior to unit restart was identified as an Inspector Follow-Up Item.
Engineering / Technical Support A programmatic weakness was identified in the area of drawings and design change control. The inspectors expressed concern that the program does not mandate a time frame for correcting known drawing problems. This was considered an Inspector Follow-Up Item.
l The inspector reviewed a completed modification regarding the installation of high point vents in the lines to the suction of the HPSI pumps. Several discrepancies were noted: (1) control room drawings l
were not updated (2) technical review for Unit I had not been completed u__.--------------
)
e 4
4
)
p Inspection Report Number (s):
50-780/89-06 Page 2 of 2 50-281/89-06 prior to returning the system to operable status. The licensee instituted corrective actions to ensure that administrative procedures provide guidance for completion of technical reviews prior to returning systems to operation.-This was considered an Unresolved Item.
A follow up on a 1983 issue which involved inadequate licensee action
.to remove unacceptable safety related parts from the warehouse inventory.resulted.in a violation citation during this inspection period.
Safety Assessment / Quality Verification An Inspector Follow-Up Item, documented.in inspection report 68-45, involved weaknesses in the licensee's program to identify and correct conditions adverse to quality. Two issues involved: (1) repeated wetting of auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump motors during periods of
-heavy rainfall and '(2) inadequate evaluation of the failure mechanism of a containment' isolation valve during repair. After review, the AFW wetting issue was been classified as a violation and will be the subject of an enforcement action conference, t$
i w______._i_
e
.f INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
j i
. PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION N0.:
j Crystal River (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904130401 INSPECTION DATES:
50-302/89-03 REPORT DATE:
01/28/89-02/24/89 03/24/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Plant operations; security; radiological controls; LERs; modifications.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Engineering / Technical Support A licensee Nonconforming Operations Report (NCOR) reported that TS do not require a sufficient number of pressurizer heaters to maintain a steam bubble in'the pressurizer following a loss of offsite power. The licensee's activities to change the TS were identified as an Inspector Follow-Up Item.
A number of strengths and weaknesses were identified during the review of drawing control as follows:
Strengths:
(I) Control room drawings appear to be up-to-date.
(2) As-built drawings are in the control room prior to the turnover to operations.
I Weaknesses:
(I) No nuclear draftsmen.
(2) Too many documents involved with drawing control and no procedure with an overview of the system or. its goals.
(3) 'The Technical Support Center could lag the control room in drawing updates.
1 i
,n
}y INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Hatch 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904060140 INSPECTION DATES:
50-321/89-03 REPORT DATE:
02/13/89-02/17/89 50-366/89-03 03/16/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, unannounced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Fire. prevention / protection program.
SUMMARY
'0F VIOLATIONS:
n No violations or deviations were identified.
. GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR' TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
l FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Plant Operations The licensee has made.significant efforts to improve the fire brigade training program. Brigade performance witnessed in a fire drill showed significant improvement. The program now appears to meet'the minimum NRC guidance; however, in order to ensure continued improvement in this area, management attention should continue to be emphasized.
I l
l j
L..
4 INSPECTION REPORT. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Shoreham (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8902140481-
. INSPECTIC A DATES:
50-322/88-11 REPORT DATE:
11/19/88-01/08/89 02/00/89 j
INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Plant operations; radiation protection; security; maintenance; surveillance.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
Overal7,. the NRC staff found the licensee's staffing levels and/or plans and schedules to be adequate to support the Power Ascension Test i
Program and operation above 5% power.
FINDINGS RELATED T0'SALP. FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Plant Operations Overall, housekeeping of the facility was found to be good. The activities associated with the startups were conducted in a safe manner consistent with station procedures. The startups were well supervised and well conducted.
i
..___m__
g
~
- E ew
$43 i
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE'
SUMMARY
M
- PLANT NAME::
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION N0.:
1 h
. Brunswick'1,2
-(DOCKETNO./SEQUENCENO.)-
8903100549 INSPECTION DATES:
~
50-325/89-02 REPORT DATE:
- 01/01/89-01/31/89 50-324/89-02.
02/27/89 n
l L
. INSPECTION. TYPE:.
Routine, resident..
L INSPECTION SCOPE:
Maintenance; surveillance; operational safety verification; LERs; miscellaneous.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:-
Failure.to place a clearance tag as required resulting in.the. wrong RHR pump' breaker.to be racked out. (Level.IV).
A licensee -identified violation regarding inadequate design of flow restricting orifice plates was not cited per 10 CFR 2, Appendix C.
~ GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC.OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
- FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
' Plant Operations' An Unresolved Item,-documented in inspection report'87-42, dealt with
~
an; event where an operator racked out the wrong RHR pump breaker. The root cause~of the-event was attributed to lack of attention to detail of the operators while hanging'the clearance tag. In addition, the operator who performed the clearance confirmation check failed to
- identify the error, because the: clearance procedure was not implemented correctly. The' Unresolved Item was reclassified as a violation.
On 1/27/89, a partial drauing of the Unit 1 Standby Liquid Control (SLQ); tank' occurred due to inadequate work control and clearance. In addition, while the' SLC tank was being inadvertently drained, the-r
-licensee was withdrawing and inserting control rods for timing purposes.- An issue was raised as~ to whether the SLC system was operable
.during.the control rod manipulations as required by TS. This was considered an Unresolved Item. It was reiterated that the lack of
-adequate work controls, specifically related to inadequate or improper clearances was a ' recurring problem with the plant.
- Maintenance / Surveillance The inspectors raised questions with respect to the acceptance criteria of the monthly Standby Gas Treatment system operability check. A potential procedural deficiency was identified.
t-M$32 i.g
-Inspection Report Number (s):.
50-325/89-02
'Page 2 of 2 50-324/89-02 Engineering / Technical Support The licensee found several. flow restricting. orifices deformed in the RHR, HPCI, RCIC, and Core Spray systems of Unit 1.-The cause was inadequate original design and specification. TheLlicensee failed to take an opportunity in 1982 to discover.this problem when a damaged:
HPCI'. full flow test orifice plate was discovered. This was considered a
- failure. to adequately correct a problem with safety related equipment
- and was considered a-licensee identified violation.
. The' inspectors-noted,two cases-where the physical electrical. separation requirements were not met. The inspectors observed.that the licensee has riot demonstrated that they have adequate controls-in place to-assure that~ physical electrical separation design conf.iguration.-is being maintained.-This was considered an Unresolved Item.
I L
_m____.___-_.._---.._--m---
i 7
w h
}
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
)
St. Lucie 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE N0.)
8904180166 1
i INSPECTION DATES:.
50-335/89-05 REPORT DATE:
i 02/14/89-02/15/89 50-389/89-05 04/03/89 02/21/89-02/24/89 03/01/89-03/03/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, announced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Unit 2 refueling outage inservice inspection (ISI).
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Maintenance / Surveillance.
Administrative and work procedures used to control activities were consistent' with code and regulatory requirements. The work was performed by personnel sufficiently trained for their assigned tasks.
Two inspector Follow-Up Items were identified regarding personnel policy and procedural matters; (1) the update of a procedure in a-contractor's QA manual, and (2) corrective actions needed to prevent
-another contractor's personnel from inattentiveness on the job.
L L
(
1 l:
1 I
' E, p___, y,-
m; Q'.,
~.s J
. INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE SUNNARY-
. ;b l.c s
' INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)-
ACCESSION N0.:
[
PLANT NAME:
- (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904180324
- North Anna ~ 1,2
' INSPECTION DATES:
50-338/89-06 REPORT.DATE:
03/06/89-03/10/89 50-339/89-06
- 03/30/89
. INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, unannounced.
- INSPECTION SCOPE:.-
e.
> Inservice; inspection program (ISI).
m
SUMMARY
0F VIOLATIONS:
No violations:or deviations were identified.
- GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
The inspection. indicated that ISI nondestructive examinations were
,being conducted adequately. The NDE personnel conducting the examinations appeared well qualified and the results of the. examination
. verifications conducted by the NRC inspector agreed well with the reported results.
^
The licensee's newly imposed requirement that all contractor NDE personnel" demonstrate their competency by satisfactorily passing:an'NDE method examination prior to being allowed to conduct examinations in 1the field-is-an' excellent safeguard for assuring that the personnel in
~
the field are well ' qualified. The licensee is requiring these-examinations in all areas of NDE including a demonstration of-competency.for.the evaluation of eddy current data. The institution of these programs by the licensee indicates a willingness to go beyond the
' minimum requirements for assuring that.ISI examinations are adequately.
addressed.
Eddy current activities associated with Unit I steam generator tube
. leak indicated that 'the licensee's system for recalling. historical eddy current data is-adequate and a review of the historical data did not.
indicate evidence of tube degradation in the area of the tube where the leak _is expected to be found.'
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
pm :.#. _.
yn; ~
>w
- e...
p
- 7
~
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:-
. INSPECTION REPORT: NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
-Trojan.
(DOCKET NO../-SEQUENCE NO.)
t8902020116' c
INSPECTION DATES:'
50-344/88-50 REPORT DATE:
- 2
-11/20/88-12/31/88 01/17/89 INSPECTION TYPE:~ -Routine.
. INSPECTION' SCOPE:
Operational safety verification; maintenance; surveillance; low power
. physics, testing; QA-program..
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.'
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC.OR-TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Engineering / Technical Support-Review of the temporary procedures used for surveillance testing of reactor _ coolant system pressure isolation: check valves 'resulted in
. questions on the technical adequacy of the procedures, kThe inspectors noted:an improvement in!the licensee' committees' depth V
of review of overall. plant performance,-plant events, and Nuclear Assurance Department performance. Due to changes in constituency and
< increased upper management involvement it appeared that the licensee's" Nuclear Operating Board (TN08) is becoming more effective.
SafetyLAssessment/ Quality Verification
'Recent problems.during the performance of temporary procedures raised concerns.on management control in this area.
The licensee management response and subsequent event evaluation of potential inoperability for the control room emergency ventilation system were-reviewed.'Although no violations were identified, concerns were raised over the adequacy of management involvement to assure operability of safety related systems.-The event also provided a-further example of a long standing issue on the inconsistent quality of
.LERs.
I
n 3
E 3:
f.e, l
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Farley 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904120274' j
INSPECTION DATES:
- 50-348/89-06 REPORT DATE:
i 02/27/89-03/03/89
'50-364/89-06 03/23/89.
INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, unannounced.
)
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Radiological effluent monitoring; radwaste treatment; chemistry.
SLHMARY OF VIOLATIONS:
No' violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Radiological-Controls -
The plant chemistry and radiochemistry programs appeared to be adequate.
The conversion to an all-licensee employee chemistry staff was considered a licensee strength.
Plant Multichannel Analyzer (MCA) equipment was_ being upgraded at the time of the inspection,-and the quality assurance measures and software verification requirements being applied to checkout of the MCAs were considered a licensee strength.
.A
=.
)
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
-McGuire 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904180247 i
INSPECTION DATES:
50-369/89-01 REPORT DATE 01/20/89-02/27/89 50-370/89-01 03/30/89 j
INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, unannounced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Operational safety verification; surveillance; maintenance; plant procedures; drawing system verification.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Three examples of failure to follow maintenance administrative procedures. (Level IV)
Inadequate chemistry procedure leading to inadvertent dilution (Level IV)
Failure to follow procedures with respect to writing Prob 1;.a Investigation Reports. (Level IV)
Two licensee identified violations regarding (1) a missed TS surveillance on snubbers, and (2) breach of fire barriers, were not issued per 10 CFR 2, Appendix C.
Another violation, regarding minor discrepancies associated with control room drawing control, was not issued on the basis of section V of the NRC Enforcement Policy.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Due to the history of procedural compliance and adequacy, managenent has increased emphasis on following procedures and correcting inadequacies in proc _edures. However, the current written guidance for use of procedures is still considered a weakness and was identified as an Inspector Follow-Up Item.
Plant Operations LER 88-29 described instances of breach of fire barriers. One of the cases reflected a management deficiency in that vendor personnel involved had not received appropriate training. The cause of others was not determined. This was considered a licensee identified violation.
]
The inspector noted that there have been several instances of breached
]
fire barriers in the past several years.
An Unresolved Item was identified with respect to an unplanned dilution l
.c..
Inspection Report Number (s):
50-369/89-01 Page 2 of 2 50-370/89-01 of the reactor coolant system when a cation bed demineralized was placed in service. The item was documented in inspection report 88-33.
It was determined that the chemistry procedure was inadequate in that it allowed the filling of the demineralized with unborated water. The Unresolved Item was reclassified as a violation.
Maintenance / Surveillance The inspectors observed that on several occasions, maintenance was performed in reinstalling and removing auxiliary feedwater system RTDs without an authorized work request. In addition, the clearance to begin work was given by the shift engineer rather than a member of the operations department as required by administrative procedures. These were considered examples of failure to follow maintenance administrative procedures. A previously Unresolved Item (88-33) regarding Work Order deficiencies associated with the replacement of control room door seals, was also considered an example of the cited violation.
Engineering / Technical Support In reviewing the drawing control program, the inspector identified some discrepancies most notable of which was an out-of-date revision.
Because of the minor technical significance of the discrepancies and the initiation of appropriate corrective action, a violation was not cited.
Safety Assessment / Quality Verification Apparent. failures of the licensee to document proble.ns in accordance with the criteria for writing Problem Investigation keports, were discovered by the inspectors. The failures were considered a violation; they may indicate weaknesses in aggressive program implementation.
I 1
1 l
l 1
l L
- y. g '.
i; INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
J s.
F PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Catawba 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCL i40.)
8904120149 INSPECTION DATES:
50-413/89-06 REPORT DATE:
02/28/89-03/03/89 50-414/89-06 03/29/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, unannounced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Snubber surveillance; main steam and pressurizer relief valve testing; surveillance of the ' standby nuclear service water (SNSW) pond dam.
SUMdARYOFVIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Maintenance / Surveillance The licensee's. program for testing relief valves and inspecting the SNSW w d dam was found to comply with the NRC requirements. However a weakness was identified in the licensee's handling of a request to amend snubber TS in that the licensee did not follow established procedures to obtain approvals for changes prior to incorporating changes into the program.
4
i
((f,o.
l i
{
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCFSSION N0.:
L Vogtle 1,2 (DOCKET NO. /. SEQUENCE NO.)
8904120098 l
INSPECTION DATES:
50-424/89-07 REPORT DATE:
01/21/89-02/17/89 50-425/89 03/21/89 i
INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident, unannounced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Plant operations; radiological controls; maintenance; surveillance; security; Unit 2 initial full load; quality programs and administrative controls.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Seven licensee-identified violations not-cited per 10 CFR 2, Appendix C:
o Failure to implement a procedure, resulting in an unplanned safety
. injection.
o Failure to establish an adequate procedure.
o Failure to establish an adequate procedure and provide adequate labeling.
o Failure to perform a TS surveillance.
o Failure to establish and implement an adequate procedure for functional testing of a radiation monitor, o Failure to comply with a TS requirement concerning operability of equipment.
o Failure to implement a procedure.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
A review of LERs resulted in a number of licensee-identified violations:
o On 10/16/88, during refueling, a safety injection was initiated during the performance of a test procedure. The cause was personnel
- error, o On 12/29/88, an unplanned ESF actuation occurred due to high activity level'in the fuel handling building caused by an inadvertent discharge of reactor coolant to the building drains. The event was caused by personnel error.
. a 1.. #
6 Inspection Report Number (s):
50-424/89-07 Page 2 of 2 50-425/89-10 o On 1/6/89, licensee personnel found improperly sized 'Jses installed in the control circuit of a Nuclear Service Water fan motor. The cause was undetermined.
o On 1/19/89, the ESF Train B chiller was inadvertently removed from service for calibration. This resulted in both trains being out of service since~ Train A had been placed out of service for maintenance the day before..This was caused by personnel error.
o On 11/11/87, an unplanned. actuation of the reactor protection system occurred. The contributing factors were personnel error and poor labeling.
o On'11/22/87, the Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio was not calculated within the time required under special conditions. The cause was the failure of the control room supervisory personnel to become aware of the L
mandatory time requirements for this TS surveillance.
o On 1/4/89, a containment ventilation isolation was initiated while a j
technician' was performing a functional test on a radiation monitor following maintenance. The event occurred due to a failure to fully inform the Shift Supervisor of testing activities, an inadequate work order, inadequate procedures, and the technician's unfamiliarity with the monitor.
L Plant' Operations While conducting an inspection of the control room, the inspector noticed a weakness in that operators did not know when or if the moderator temperature coefficient went positive on a down power transient. Furthermore, this information was not available in the control room.
An Inspector Follow-Up Item was identified regarding the confusing state of the operability of the auxiliary feedwater actuation upon loss l
of the feed pumps.
i The inspector identified areas in the Unit 2 containment typical of l
poor housekeeping practices or ineffective cleanup effort.
l 1'
e, e
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION N0.:
Bellefonte 1,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE N0.)
8904140184 INSPECTION DATES:
50-438/88-06 REPORT DATE:
10/31/88-11/10/88 50-439/88-06 03/02/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Special, team, announced.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Program for placing plant into a deferred condition.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Failure to follow procedures for preventive maintenance. (Level IV)
Failure to have health physics coverage as required by SNM license.
(Level IV)
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
The portion of the deferral program that was examined during the inspection indicates that the program was generally acceptable. Several areas need improvement. The preventive maintenance program needs to address the use of vapor phase inhibitors, input and requirements.
Licensing changes and training of personnel need to be addressed in the area of control of radioactive materials. All other areas appear to have been adequately addressed in the program.
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Radiological Controls During the inspection and for a period of one month preceding the inspection, the plant organization did not contain an onsite radiological control group or onsite health physics personnel. This was l
considered a violation.
1 The need for better radiological and administrative controls and the submittal by the licensee of a license amendment to re-specify and better define the site radiological controls, was identified as an Unresolved Item.
l Maintenance / Surveillance During a plant walkdown inspection, the inspector selected specific components to ensure the licensee had considered the recommended vendor storage requirements and included them in the preventive maintenance program. A number of deficiencies were collectively identified as a violation as follows:
o Three examples involving improper control of vapor phase inhibitors.
g;-
e a.
Inspection Report Number (s):
50-438/88-06 Page 2 of 2 50-439/88-06 o A preventive maintenance task change not properly completed.
o Vendor information not implemented during preventive maintenance of
- personnel air. locks.
.j An Unresolved Item was identified regarding the removal of Zerust.
1 capsules (vapor' phase inhibitors) from some components like electrical boxes and heated limitorque operators.
Minor fire protection equipment testing problems were identified as an l
Inspector Follow-Up Item.
o__ __
I.,, * -
V',
l INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1 PLANT NAME:
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Catawba I,2 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8904180259-INSPECTION DATES:
50-413/89-05 REPORT DATE:
'{
02/04/89-02/25/89 50-414/89-05 03/29/89 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
)
Plant. operations; surveillance; maintenance; LERs; Part 21 reports.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
Inadequate test procedure. (Level IV).
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Maintenance / Surveillance t.
On 2/21/89, Unit 2 experienced a reactor trip on low steam generator l
1evel, which was followed by a series of two safety injection actuations. Preliminary inspection findings indicated that the
.. transient was the result of inappropriate troubleshooting maintenance techniques in placing an electrical jumper which short-circuited the power supply to the MSIV control circuitry. Investigative efforts relative to the event were. incomplete. This was considered an Unresolved Item.
On I/27/89, an attempt to start the Unit I turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump, resulted in pump seizure. It was determined that after maintenance was performed on the system earlier, the piping was not vented after it.was filled. It was not conclusive that this contributed to the pump seizure, however, the fact that the procedure was inadequate to ensure that the piping was vented was identified as a violation.
l
F t
INSPECTION REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PLANT NAME:.
INSPECTION REPORT NUMBER (S)
ACCESSION NO.:
Palo Verde 1,2,3 (DOCKET NO. / SEQUENCE NO.)
8901270298 INSPECTION DATES:
50-528/88-41 REPORT DATE:
11/06/88-12/16/38 50-529/88-40 01/11/89 50-530/88-39 INSPECTION TYPE:
Routine, resident and region-based.
INSPECTION SCOPE:
Plant activities; ESF systems walkdown; maintenance; surveillance; Unit 3 startup testing; quality assurance; miscellaneous.
SUMMARY
OF VIOLATIONS:
No violations or deviations were identified.
GENERAL / PROGRAMMATIC OR TECHNICAL FINDINGS:
FINDINGS RELATED TO SALP FUNCTIONAL AREAS:
Plant Operations A Unit 1 licensed operator was observed in a relaxed position and appeared not to be attentive to plant operations. While this appeared to be an isolated incident, it reflected acceptance of poor work practice by the individual and the shift.
Prior to Control Element Assembly (CEA) testing a Unit 1 Shift Supervisor conducted a crew briefing that included anticipated problems and potential TS Limiting Conditions for operation that may have been encountered. As a result, when CEAs slipped, the crew was able to readily recover them.
On 11/25/88, Unit 2 experienced a reactor trip on low steam generator level. The licensee post-trip review identified, among others, some control room operator performance concerns. The inspector found the scope of the post-trip review thorough and the corrective actions j
adequate.
Radiological Controls The presence of food debris and cigarette remnants was noted in a Radiological Controlled Area at Unit' 3. This was evidence that some workers did not observe fundamental radiological controls.
Maintenance / Surveillance While reviewing a Work Order the inspector noted that the order did not contain a signature block for the Work Group Supervisor to document his required review. This was censidered an Unresolved Item.
l
n:
, j y
i
. s*
Inspection Report Number (s):
50-528/88 41 Page 2 of 2 50-529/88-40 50-530/88-39 j
Safety Assessment / Quality Verification During a walkdown of the Unit 2 Fuel Building the inspector noted the sound of leaking pressurized air in the vicinity of air hoses supplying
. pressure to the inflatable seals on two separate doors. The air leakage
'had not been investigated by operators, RP Technicians and others although the leaking hose had been reported. The deficiency was similar to one reported in the NRC-Information Notice 88-92 " Potential for Spent Fuel Pool Draindown". The inspector concluded that the Unit 2 operations staff had not aggressively followed up on the notice.
The licensee has initiated actions by way of QA/QC improvement plans, to provide an increased orientation toward carformance-based inspections. However, the trending program is in need of serious reassessment and definition to assure that organizations which are responsible for poor' performance are put on notice for improvement.
_____m.___
___1___.