ML20209E044: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 20: Line 20:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:.
{{#Wiki_filter:.
                    p2 Ric                                   UNITED STATES
p2 Ric
                          oq'o                 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES
              2
oq'o
                /    ~
/
                              g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                              o                               REGloN il
2
              5               $                 101 M ARIETTA STREET N.W., SUITE 2900
~
              *               8
g
                o                                        ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323
o
                s,
REGloN il
                    .....
5
                            /
$
                  Report No.:       50-424/87-01
101 M ARIETTA STREET N.W., SUITE 2900
                  Licensee: Georgia Power Company
*
                                  P. O. Box 4545
8
                                  Atlanta, GA 30302
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323
                  Docket No.: 50-424                                                       License No.: NPF-61
o
                  Facility Name: Vogtle 1
s,
                  Inspection Conducted: January 5 - 9 and January 12 - 16, 1987
/
                  Inspector:           h OM
.....
                                L. J./ Watson, Team Leader
Report No.:
                                                                                                        '/!87
50-424/87-01
                                                                                                  Dath Signed
Licensee: Georgia Power Company
                  Team Members:         B. R. Bonser
P. O. Box 4545
                                        M. S. Lesser
Atlanta, GA 30302
                                        A. R. Long
Docket No.: 50-424
                                        P. B. Moore
License No.: NPF-61
                                        G. Nejfelt
Facility Name: Vogtle 1
l                                     T. J. O'Connor
Inspection Conducted: January 5 - 9 and January 12 - 16, 1987
Inspector:
h OM
'/!87
L. J./ Watson, Team Leader
Dath Signed
Team Members:
B. R. Bonser
M. S. Lesser
A. R. Long
P. B. Moore
G. Nejfelt
l
T. J. O'Connor
W. K. Poertner
'
'
                                        W. K. Poertner
M. B. Shymlock
                                        M. B. Shymlock
C. L. Vanderneit
                                        C. L. Vanderneit
Approved By:
                  Approved By:                     WO
WO
                                  M. B. ShymlocY, Chief
M8,887
                                                                                              M8,887
M. B. ShymlocY, Chief
                                                                                                Date Signed
Date Signed
                                    Operational Programs Section
Operational Programs Section
                                    Division of Reactor Safety
Division of Reactor Safety
                                                                SUMMARY
SUMMARY
                  Scope:       This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of
Scope:
                  surveillance program administrative controls and implementation, maintenance
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of
                  program administrative controls and implementation, Technical Specifications
surveillance program administrative controls and implementation, maintenance
                  applicability to as-built systems, control room activities and plant
program administrative controls and implementation, Technical Specifications
                  procedures.         Corrective action for findings described in NRC Inspection
applicability to as-built systems, control room activities and plant
                  Reports 424/85-36, 424/86-60 and 424/86-117 were reviewed.
procedures.
                  Results:       One violation was identified involving four examples of failure to
Corrective action for findings described in NRC Inspection
                  follow procedures. No deviations were identified.
Reports 424/85-36, 424/86-60 and 424/86-117 were reviewed.
                  8704290419 870417
Results:
                  PDR
One violation was identified involving four examples of failure to
                  O        ADOCK 05000424
follow procedures. No deviations were identified.
                                            PDR
8704290419 870417
                                                                                                                        -.
PDR
  . - - - .               -                                 .         -- _ -         - ._               -. .. . - .
ADOCK 05000424
O
PDR
. - - - .
-
.
-- _ -
- ._
-.
..
. - .
-.


  .. ..               _                                                                   _. _.                                                           -
..
..
_
_.
_.
-
l
l
4
4
!
!
                                                              REPORT DETAILS
REPORT DETAILS
        1.   Persons Contacted
1.
              Licensee Employees
Persons Contacted
;           #*P. D. Rice, Vice President, Project Engineering
Licensee Employees
;
#*P. D. Rice, Vice President, Project Engineering
#*G. B. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager, Nuclear Operations
'
'
            #*G. B. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager, Nuclear Operations
#*T. Greene, Plant Manager
            #*T. Greene, Plant Manager
#*E. M. Dannemiller II, Technical Assistant to General Manager, Nuclear
            #*E. M. Dannemiller II, Technical Assistant to General Manager, Nuclear
Operations
                Operations
#*C. E. Belflower, QA Site Manager
            #*C. E. Belflower, QA Site Manager
#*M. A. Griffis, Maintenance Superintendent
            #*M. A. Griffis, Maintenance Superintendent
#*J. F. D'Amico, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance
            #*J. F. D'Amico, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance
#*W. C. Gabbard, Senior Regulatory Specialist
            #*W. C. Gabbard, Senior Regulatory Specialist
*C. E. Felton, Vogtle Coordinator, Nuclear Operations
            *C. E. Felton, Vogtle Coordinator, Nuclear Operations
*L. F. Ray, Shift Supervisor
            *L. F. Ray, Shift Supervisor
*P. D. Rushton, Plant Training and Emergency Planning Manager
            *P. D. Rushton, Plant Training and Emergency Planning Manager
#*W. E. Burns, Nuclear Licensing Manager
            #*W. E. Burns, Nuclear Licensing Manager
#*R. M. Bellamy, Plant Support Manager
            #*R. M. Bellamy, Plant Support Manager
*T. A. Seitz, Corporate Nuclear Office of Quality Assurance
            *T. A. Seitz, Corporate Nuclear Office of Quality Assurance
*J. E. Swartzwelder, Deputy Manager, Operations
            *J. E. Swartzwelder, Deputy Manager, Operations
#*H. A. Jaynes, Maintenance Engineering Supervisor
            #*H. A. Jaynes, Maintenance Engineering Supervisor
*A. L. Mosbaugh, Assistant Plant Support Manager
            *A. L. Mosbaugh, Assistant Plant Support Manager
*M. L. Hobbs, Instrument and Controls Superintendent
            *M. L. Hobbs, Instrument and Controls Superintendent
*R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President and Project Director
,
,
            *R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President and Project Director
*J. A. Edwards, Senior Regulatory Specialist
'
'
            *J. A. Edwards, Senior Regulatory Specialist
#*W. F. Kitchens, Manager, Operations
            #*W. F. Kitchens, Manager, Operations
#L. Russell, Operations Procedure Coordinator
            #L. Russell, Operations Procedure Coordinator
d*C. F. Meyer, Superintendent, Operations
            d*C. F. Meyer, Superintendent, Operations
fA. Caudill, Superintendent, Operations
              fA. Caudill, Superintendent, Operations
,
,
#H. Varnadoe, Plant Engineering Supervisor
            #H. Varnadoe, Plant Engineering Supervisor
i
i
Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians,
4
4
              Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians,
operators, mechanics, and of fice personnel.
              operators, mechanics, and of fice personnel.
!
!             NRC Resident Inspectors
NRC Resident Inspectors
            *J. F. Rogge
*J. F. Rogge
            *R. J. Schepens
*R. J. Schepens
,          +*H. Livermore
+*H. Livermore
j             * Attended exit interview on January 9, 1987
,
              # Attended exit interview on January 16, 1987
j
* Attended exit interview on January 9, 1987
# Attended exit interview on January 16, 1987
i
i
i
i
!
!
                      . . _ _ , _ _ , _ _ _ . , - , . . . _ _     ._ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .._      _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - . _ __ _ , _ - _ . . , . . _ _ _ , ,
. . _ _ ,
_ _ , _ _ _ . , - , . . . _ _
.
.
..
_ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - . _ __ _ , _ - _ . . , . . _ _ _ , ,


                                    J
J
                                        2
2
2. Exit Interview
2.
  The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 9 and 16,
Exit Interview
  1987 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.           The
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 9 and 16,
  inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the
1987 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
  inspection findings listed below.       No dissenting comments were
The
  received from the licensee.
inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the
  IFI Number     Status   Description / Reference Paragraph
inspection findings listed below.
  424/87-01-01   Open     VIOLATION - Failure to follow procedure for
No dissenting comments were
                            1) confirmation of test results for vital battery
received from the licensee.
                            surveillance (paragraph 7.a.1), 2) QA hold point
IFI Number
                            review and Shift Supervisor approval to work MWO
Status
                            (paragraph 7.b.1), 3) verification by maintenance
Description / Reference Paragraph
                            technicians that drawings and vendor manuals were
424/87-01-01
                            current revisions (paragraph 8.a), 4) review and
Open
                            initialing operations logs (paragraph 10.b)
VIOLATION - Failure to follow procedure for
  424/87-01-02   Open     IFI - Review of provisions for determining that
1) confirmation of test results for vital battery
                            acceptance criteria are met (paragraphs 7.a.8
surveillance (paragraph 7.a.1), 2) QA hold point
                            and 12.11)
review and Shift Supervisor approval to work MWO
  424/87-01-03   Closed   IFI - Followup on adequacy of functional tests
(paragraph 7.b.1), 3) verification by maintenance
                            and work instructions for maintenance (paragraphs
technicians that drawings and vendor manuals were
                            8.c and 12.jj)
current revisions (paragraph 8.a), 4) review and
  424/87-01-04   Open     IFI - Completion of QA review of DR on mounting
initialing operations logs (paragraph 10.b)
                            of radiation monitors (paragraphs 7.b.1 and
424/87-01-02
                            12.kk)
Open
  424/87-01-05   Closed   IFI - Determination if temporary modifications
IFI - Review of provisions for determining that
                            negated surveillance tests completed after
acceptance criteria are met (paragraphs 7.a.8
                            preoperational tests (paragraphs 9 and 12.11)
and 12.11)
  424/87-01-06   Open     IFI - Miscellaneous Findings on Surveillance and
424/87-01-03
                            Maintenance Program Review (paragraphs 7.b.3 and
Closed
                            12.mm)
IFI - Followup on adequacy of functional tests
  424/87-01-07   Closed   IFI - Use of Master Setpoint Document (paragraphs
and work instructions for maintenance (paragraphs
                            12.nand12.nn)
8.c and 12.jj)
  424/86-117-01 Closed     IFI - Administrative controls for independent
424/87-01-04
                            verification of the restoration and testing of
Open
                            plant equipment did not conform to the guidance
IFI - Completion of QA review of DR on mounting
                            of NRC IE Notice 84-51 (paragraph 12.c)
of radiation monitors (paragraphs 7.b.1 and
  424/86-117-02 Closed     IFI - Venting followup items including high point
12.kk)
                            vents on AFW and procedure revisions for system
424/87-01-05
                            venting (paragraph 12.d)
Closed
IFI - Determination if temporary modifications
negated surveillance tests completed after
preoperational tests (paragraphs 9 and 12.11)
424/87-01-06
Open
IFI - Miscellaneous Findings on Surveillance and
Maintenance Program Review (paragraphs 7.b.3 and
12.mm)
424/87-01-07
Closed
IFI - Use of Master Setpoint Document (paragraphs
12.nand12.nn)
424/86-117-01 Closed
IFI - Administrative controls for independent
verification of the restoration and testing of
plant equipment did not conform to the guidance
of NRC IE Notice 84-51 (paragraph 12.c)
424/86-117-02 Closed
IFI - Venting followup items including high point
vents on AFW and procedure revisions for system
venting (paragraph 12.d)


  - - -                . -    -- _            .                                .
- -
                                                            3
        424/86-117-03 Closed                  IFI - Procedure revisions to include adequate
                                              subcooling margin requirements (paragraph 12.e)
-
-
        424/86-117-04 Closed                 IFI - Correction of valve identification and
.
i                                             system lineup discrepancies (paragraph 12.f)
-
        424/86-117-05 Closed                 IFI - Correction of technical concerns in Unit
-- _
:                                            Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.g)
.
        424/86-117-07 Open                   IFI - Correction of discrepancies on labeling
.
                                              of valves and equipment (paragraph 12.h)
3
        424/86-117-09 Open                   IFI - Correction of discrepancies in RVLIS
424/86-117-03 Closed
                                              surveillance procedure and followup on vendor
IFI - Procedure revisions to include adequate
                                              recommendations (paragraph 12.1)
subcooling margin requirements (paragraph 12.e)
        424/86-117-10 Closed                 IFI - Procedure revision to include check of
424/86-117-04 Closed
i                                             equipment actuation on Control Room ventilation
IFI - Correction of valve identification and
                                              start (paragraph 12.j)
-
        424/86-117-11 Closed                 IFI - Procedure prerequisites are general and not
i
                                              well understood by operators (paragraph 12.k)
system lineup discrepancies (paragraph 12.f)
        424/86-117-12 Closed                 IFI   -
424/86-117-05 Closed
                                                        Clarification of cleanliness levels
IFI - Correction of technical concerns in Unit
                                              (paragraph 12.1)
Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.g)
        424/86-117-13 Closed                 IFI - Review of events covered by Abnormal
:
                                              Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.m)
424/86-117-07 Open
                                              IFI - Licensee to review annunciator response
IFI - Correction of discrepancies on labeling
of valves and equipment (paragraph 12.h)
424/86-117-09 Open
IFI - Correction of discrepancies in RVLIS
surveillance procedure and followup on vendor
recommendations (paragraph 12.1)
424/86-117-10 Closed
IFI - Procedure revision to include check of
i
equipment actuation on Control Room ventilation
start (paragraph 12.j)
424/86-117-11 Closed
IFI - Procedure prerequisites are general and not
well understood by operators (paragraph 12.k)
Clarification of cleanliness levels
424/86-117-12 Closed
IFI
-
(paragraph 12.1)
424/86-117-13 Closed
IFI - Review of events covered by Abnormal
Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.m)
*
*
        424/86-117-14 Closed
424/86-117-14 Closed
j                                             procedures for technical adequacy, walkdown
IFI - Licensee to review annunciator response
                                              ARPs and revise ARPs involving annunciators
j
,                                            on the main control board, as appropriate,
procedures for technical adequacy, walkdown
                                              prior to fuel load.     Remaining ARPs to be
ARPs and revise ARPs involving annunciators
                                              reviewed within 90 days (paragraph 12.n)
on the main control board, as appropriate,
,
prior to fuel load.
Remaining ARPs to be
reviewed within 90 days (paragraph 12.n)
!
!
        424/86-117-15 Closed                 IFI - Resolution of ISI test data for CCW pump
424/86-117-15 Closed
                                              (paragraph 12.0)                                                     ,
IFI - Resolution of ISI test data for CCW pump
        424/86-117-16 Closed                 IFI - Resolution of acceptance criteria for
(paragraph 12.0)
                                              RHR differential pressure on recirc flow
,
                                              (paragraph 12.p)
424/86-117-16 Closed
        424/86-117-17 Closed                 IFI - Resolution of water hammer in NSCW ESF
IFI - Resolution of acceptance criteria for
                                              chillers (paragraph 12.q)
RHR differential pressure on recirc flow
        424/86-117-18 Closed                 IFI - Review of implementation of the surveil-
(paragraph 12.p)
                                              lance program administrative controls and
424/86-117-17 Closed
                                              tracking system (paragraph 12.r)
IFI - Resolution of water hammer in NSCW ESF
chillers (paragraph 12.q)
424/86-117-18 Closed
IFI - Review of implementation of the surveil-
lance program administrative controls and
tracking system (paragraph 12.r)
,
,
l
l
          . _ . - . , - .   . .     . - - - .
. _ . - . , - .
                                                  ,-   . - - - . -       _ . -     - . _ - , . . _ _ , . . . . , ,
. .
. - - -
.
,-
. - - - .
-
_ . -
- . _
- , . . _ _ ,
.
. . . , ,


                                                                              .     . _ = = _ .         .
.
. _ = = _ .
.
4
4
                                        4
4
    424/86-117-19 Closed   IFI - Review of test control and configura-
424/86-117-19 Closed
                            tion control for surveillances performed
IFI - Review of test control and configura-
                            prior to release to the Operations Department
tion
                            (paragraph 12.s)
control
    424/86-117-20 Closed   IFI - Revise procedures to clarify use of
for surveillances
                            Staggered Test Basis for determining frequency
performed
                            of test (paragraph 12.t)
prior to release to the Operations Department
    424/86-117-21 Closed   IFI - Review of the justification for the use
(paragraph 12.s)
                            of pre-operational tests to meet surveillance
424/86-117-20 Closed
                            test requirements (paragraph 12.u)
IFI - Revise procedures to clarify use of
    424/86-117-22 Closed   IFI - Corrective action to assure control of
Staggered Test Basis for determining frequency
4                          twelve hour surveillances (paragraph 12.v)
of test (paragraph 12.t)
    424/86-117-23 Open     IFI - Resolution of various technical issues
424/86-117-21 Closed
                            in regard to surveillance procedure adequacy
IFI - Review of the justification for the use
                            (paragraph 12.w)
of pre-operational tests to meet surveillance
    424/86-117-24 Closed   IFI - Licensee to implement operational phase
test requirements (paragraph 12.u)
                            corrective and preventive maintenance program
424/86-117-22 Closed
                            (paragraph 12.x)
IFI - Corrective action to assure control of
    424/86-117-25 Closed   IFI - Resolution of Technical Specification
twelve hour surveillances (paragraph 12.v)
                            3/4.7.5 wording
4
                            the Ultimate   Heat in    regparagraph
424/86-117-23 Open
                                                    Sink   (ard to availability 12.y)               of
IFI - Resolution of various technical issues
    424/86-117-26 Closed   IFI - Corrective action for locking or system
in regard to surveillance procedure adequacy
                            lineup verification of boron injection flowpath
(paragraph 12.w)
<                          valves (paragraph 12.z)
424/86-117-24 Closed
                                                                                                                    '
IFI - Licensee to implement operational phase
    424/86-117-27 Open     IFI - Followup on surveillance procedures
corrective and preventive maintenance program
                            which have not been identified as complete
(paragraph 12.x)
,                          on the Technical Specification / procedure
424/86-117-25 Closed
i                           cross reference tracking list and review of
IFI - Resolution of Technical Specification
                            completed     cross     reference           tracking             list
3/4.7.5 wording in reg (ard to availability of
the Ultimate Heat Sink paragraph 12.y)
424/86-117-26 Closed
IFI - Corrective action for locking or system
lineup verification of boron injection flowpath
valves (paragraph 12.z)
<
'
424/86-117-27 Open
IFI - Followup on surveillance procedures
which have not been identified as complete
on the Technical Specification / procedure
,
i
cross reference tracking list and review of
completed
cross
reference
tracking
list
-
-
                            (paragraph 12.aa)
(paragraph 12.aa)
    424/86-117-28 Closed   IFI - Procedure revision for consistent defini-
424/86-117-28 Closed
                            tion of surveillance test completion date and
IFI - Procedure revision for consistent defini-
                            time (paragraph 12.cc)
tion of surveillance test completion date and
    424/86-117-29 Closed   IFI - Review of implementation of special
time (paragraph 12.cc)
                            triggering mechanisms to assure completion of
424/86-117-29 Closed
                            special   condition surveillances                     (paragraph
IFI - Review of implementation of special
                            12.dd)
triggering mechanisms to assure completion of
    424/86-117-30 Closed    IFI - Controls on location of BOP operator
special
condition surveillances
(paragraph
12.dd)
l
l
                            (paragraph 12.ee)
424/86-117-30 Closed
  _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _____.           ._       _ __         _ _ _ _ _ . . _ .                       _.   . _ _ _ .
IFI - Controls on location of BOP operator
(paragraph 12.ee)
-
_
.
. .
.
._
_ __
    . . .
_.
.
.


          _     ___         -                         _     .                               . - _
_
                                                                                  5
___
            424/86-117-31 Open                                     IFI - Verification of key control and access
-
                                                                    to plant equipment by operations staff (para-
_
                                                                    graph 12.ff)
.
            424/86-117-32 Closed                                   IFI - Revise TS and procedure for 18 month check
. - _
                                                                    of reactor trip breaker UV and shunt coil trip
5
                                                                    (paragraph 12 99)
424/86-117-31 Open
            424/86-117-33 Open                                     IFI - Resolution of miscellaneous technical
IFI - Verification of key control and access
                                                                    concerns on operating procedures (paragraph
to plant equipment by operations staff (para-
                                                                    12.hh)
graph 12.ff)
            424/86-60-10                                 Closed     IFI - Adequacy of shift turnover procedures
424/86-117-32 Closed
                                                                    (paragraphs 10.b and 12.00)
IFI - Revise TS and procedure for 18 month check
            424/86-96-05                                 Closed     IFI - Review of completed surveillance procedures
of reactor trip breaker UV and shunt coil trip
                                                                    (paragraph 12.bb)
(paragraph 12 99)
            TMI It e T.C.2 Closed                                   Shift Relief and Turnover (paragraphs 6 and 10.b)
424/86-117-33 Open
            Although proprietary material was reviewed during the inspection, no
IFI - Resolution of miscellaneous technical
            proprietary material is contained in this report.
concerns on operating procedures (paragraph
        3.   Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
12.hh)
            This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
424/86-60-10
        4.  Unresolved Items
Closed
IFI - Adequacy of shift turnover procedures
(paragraphs 10.b and 12.00)
424/86-96-05
Closed
IFI - Review of completed surveillance procedures
(paragraph 12.bb)
TMI It e T.C.2 Closed
Shift Relief and Turnover (paragraphs 6 and 10.b)
Although proprietary material was reviewed during the inspection, no
proprietary material is contained in this report.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
]
]
;           No unresolved items were identified during the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
;
No unresolved items were identified during the inspection.
;
;
        5.   List of Abbreviations
5.
i           ACCW(S)                 Auxiliary Component Cooling Water System
List of Abbreviations
            AFW                     Auxiliary Feedwater System
i
            A0P                     Abnormal Operating Procedure
ACCW(S)
            ARP                     Annunciator Response Procedure
Auxiliary Component Cooling Water System
            BIT                     Boron Injection Tank
AFW
            B0P                     Balance of Plant
Auxiliary Feedwater System
            CBCS                     Containment Building Cooling System
A0P
            CCP                     Centrifugal Charging Pump
Abnormal Operating Procedure
            CCW(S)                   Component Cooling Water System
ARP
            CSS                     Containment Spray System
Annunciator Response Procedure
            CVCS                   Chemical and Volume Control System
BIT
Boron Injection Tank
B0P
Balance of Plant
CBCS
Containment Building Cooling System
CCP
Centrifugal Charging Pump
CCW(S)
Component Cooling Water System
CSS
Containment Spray System
CVCS
Chemical and Volume Control System
DR
Deficiency Report
i'
i'
            DR                      Deficiency Report
ECCS
            ECCS                    Emergency Core Cooling System (s)
Emergency Core Cooling System (s)
            EDG                     Emergency Diesel Generators
EDG
            E0P                     Emergency Operating Procedure
Emergency Diesel Generators
            EQ                       Environmental Qualification
E0P
            EQDP                     Environmental Qualification Data Package
Emergency Operating Procedure
            ESF                     Engineered Safety Feature
EQ
Environmental Qualification
EQDP
Environmental Qualification Data Package
ESF
Engineered Safety Feature
i
i
l
l
4
4
  n,~,       . - -   . - - , - , - - - - - - , , - - - ,         ,   _
n,~,
                                                                              , , - . . , , _ ,       . ,, , . , , - , , - . ,,-_-,-.g- ,-..,,,,-,-,,,,--,.m.-m--g. , , , , - ,,
. - -
. - - , - , - - - - - - , , - - - ,
,
_
, , - . . , , _ ,
. ,, , . , , - , , - .
,,-_-,-.g-
,-..,,,,-,-,,,,--,.m.-m--g.
, , , , - ,,


  ..       -   _   -     .-_         _   -                   _.   _           - . . _
..
-
_
-
.-_
_
-
_.
_
- . . _
i
i
j
j
                                            6
6
:
:
        F         Degrees Fahrenheit
F
        FSAR     Final Safety Analysis Report
Degrees Fahrenheit
        HFAS     High Flux at Shutdown
FSAR
        HVAC     Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
Final Safety Analysis Report
        HX       Heat Exchanger
HFAS
        IEN       NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Notice
High Flux at Shutdown
        IFI       Inspector Followup Item
HVAC
        IST       Inservice Test
Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
        LP       Lineup Procedure
HX
        MDAFW(P) Motor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)
Heat Exchanger
        MLB       Monitor Light Board
IEN
        M0V       Motor Operated Valve
NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Notice
        MSIV     Main Steam Isolation Valve
IFI
        MWO       Maintenance Work Order
Inspector Followup Item
        MWPG     Maintenance Work Planning Group
IST
        NLO       Non-Licensed Operator
Inservice Test
        NPMIS     Nuclear Plant Maintenance Information System
LP
        NRC       Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Lineup Procedure
        NSAC     Nuclear Safety and Compliance Section
MDAFW(P) Motor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)
        NSCW     Nuclear Service Cooling Water System
MLB
        P&ID     Piping and Instrumentation Diagram
Monitor Light Board
        PORV     Power Operated Relief Valve
M0V
        PRZR     Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer
Motor Operated Valve
        QA       Quality   Assurance
MSIV
        RCS       Reactor Coolant System
Main Steam Isolation Valve
        RER       Request for Engineering Evaluation
MWO
        RHR       Residual Heat Removal System
Maintenance Work Order
        R0       Reactor Operator
MWPG
        RVLIS     Reactor Vessel Level Indication System
Maintenance Work Planning Group
        RWST     Refueling Water Storage Tank
NLO
        SI       Safety Injection
Non-Licensed Operator
        SIS       Safety Injection System
NPMIS
        SG       Steam Generator
Nuclear Plant Maintenance Information System
        S0P       System Operating Procedure
NRC
        SS       Shift Supervisor
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
        SSMP     System Status Monitoring Panel
NSAC
        STS       Standard Technical. Specifications
Nuclear Safety and Compliance Section
        TCP       Temporary Change to Procedure
NSCW
        TDAFW(P) Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)
Nuclear Service Cooling Water System
        TS       Technical Specification
P&ID
        UOP       Unit Operating Procedure
Piping and Instrumentation Diagram
        VCT       Volume Control Tank
PORV
    6. Review of TMI Items (TI 2515/65)
Power Operated Relief Valve
        (Closed) TMI Item I.C.2. Shift Relief and Turnover. The inspector               ,
PRZR
        reviewed the implementation of the requirements of TMI Item I.C.2 and           i
Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer
        determined that the licensee had completed the actions necessary to meet         I
QA
        these requirements. This review is documented fi paragraph 10.b of this         i
Quality Assurance
        report. TMI Item I.C.2 is closed.                                               ;
RCS
                                                                                        l
Reactor Coolant System
                                                                                        ,
RER
Request for Engineering Evaluation
RHR
Residual Heat Removal System
R0
Reactor Operator
RVLIS
Reactor Vessel Level Indication System
RWST
Refueling Water Storage Tank
SI
Safety Injection
SIS
Safety Injection System
SG
Steam Generator
S0P
System Operating Procedure
SS
Shift Supervisor
SSMP
System Status Monitoring Panel
STS
Standard Technical. Specifications
TCP
Temporary Change to Procedure
TDAFW(P) Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)
TS
Technical Specification
UOP
Unit Operating Procedure
VCT
Volume Control Tank
6.
Review of TMI Items (TI 2515/65)
(Closed) TMI Item I.C.2.
Shift Relief and Turnover.
The inspector
,
reviewed the implementation of the requirements of TMI Item I.C.2 and
i
determined that the licensee had completed the actions necessary to meet
these requirements.
This review is documented fi paragraph 10.b of this
i
report. TMI Item I.C.2 is closed.
,


                                        7
7
7. Surveillance Program and Procedure Review (42450B)
7.
  During the inspection ending December 12, 1986, the inspectors had
Surveillance Program and Procedure Review (42450B)
  determined that the licensee had not yet fully implemented the surveil-
During the inspection ending December 12, 1986, the inspectors had
  lance program administrative controls except on a small number of systems
determined that the licensee had not yet fully implemented the surveil-
  which had been accepted by the Operations Department. This item had been
lance program administrative controls except on a small number of systems
  identified as IFI 424/86-117-18. During this inspection, the inspectors
which had been accepted by the Operations Department. This item had been
  reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number of
identified as IFI 424/86-117-18.
  additional surveillance test packages.     Although several concerns and
During this inspection, the inspectors
  one example of a failure to follow procedure were identified; in general,
reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number of
  the results of this review indicated that the surveillance program was
additional surveillance test packages.
  adequately implemented.     The review conducted is documented below.   IFI
Although several concerns and
  424/86-117-18 is closed,
one example of a failure to follow procedure were identified; in general,
  a.   Review of Completed Surveillance Packages
the results of this review indicated that the surveillance program was
        The inspectors reviewed completed active surveillance packages.       The
adequately implemented.
        surveillance reviews were performed to verify that specific controls
The review conducted is documented below.
        were established and the surveillance system was working in accord-
IFI
        ance with procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program. The
424/86-117-18 is closed,
        inspectors reviewed the following:
a.
        -
Review of Completed Surveillance Packages
              System was readied by Operations before performance of the
The inspectors reviewed completed active surveillance packages.
              surveillance.
The
        -
surveillance reviews were performed to verify that specific controls
              Prerequisites were completed and if not completed, adequate
were established and the surveillance system was working in accord-
              justification was provided for prerequisites which were
ance with procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.
              marked not applicable.
The
        -
inspectors reviewed the following:
              All procedural steps were completed or marked appropriately.
-
        -
System was readied by Operations before performance of the
              Acceptance criteria were met and completed surveillances
surveillance.
              were included in the surveillance tracking system.
-
        -    Data packages supported the acceptance criteria.
Prerequisites were completed and if not completed, adequate
        -     Task sheets were attached and completed in accordance with
justification was provided for prerequisites which were
              procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.
marked not applicable.
        -
-
              Appropriate reviews were completed as required.
All procedural steps were completed or marked appropriately.
        The surveillance packages reviewed were:
-
        SURV. TASK             TITLE                             COMPLETED DATE
Acceptance criteria were met and completed surveillances
        14225-101 Operations Weekly Surveillance Logs                 1/14/87
were included in the surveillance tracking system.
        14235-102 On Site Power Distribution Operability             1/10/87
Data packages supported the acceptance criteria.
                    Verification
-
        14420-101 Solid State Protection System Train A               1/01/87
Task sheets were attached and completed in accordance with
                    (B) Operability Test
-
procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.
Appropriate reviews were completed as required.
-
The surveillance packages reviewed were:
SURV. TASK
TITLE
COMPLETED DATE
14225-101 Operations Weekly Surveillance Logs
1/14/87
14235-102 On Site Power Distribution Operability
1/10/87
Verification
14420-101 Solid State Protection System Train A
1/01/87
(B) Operability Test


                                8
8
  14420-102 Solid State Protection System Train A           1/10/87
14420-102 Solid State Protection System Train A
            (B) Operability Test
1/10/87
  14423-106 Source Range NIS Analog Channel                 1/14/87
(B) Operability Test
            Operational Test
14423-106 Source Range NIS Analog Channel
  14805-101 Residual Heat Removal Pump and Check           1/09/87
1/14/87
            Valve Inservice Test
Operational Test
  14811-101 Boric Acid Trant.fer Pumps and Discharge       1/08/87
14805-101 Residual Heat Removal Pump and Check
            Check Valves Ir. service Test
1/09/87
  14850-102 Cold Shutdown Valve Inservice Test             1/08/87
Valve Inservice Test
  14890-1   Diesel Generctor Operability Test           Not recorded
14811-101 Boric Acid Trant.fer Pumps and Discharge
  14895-101 ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice           9/27/86
1/08/87
  14896-101 ECCS Check Valve Cold Shutdown Inservice       9/22/86
Check Valves Ir. service Test
  14980-111 Diesel Generator Operability Test               1/09/87
14850-102 Cold Shutdown Valve Inservice Test
  14980-1   Diesel Generator Test                       Not recorded
1/08/87
            (Fuel Oil Sampling for Water)
14890-1
  24342-1   Pressurizer Level Control F-121             Not recorded
Diesel Generctor Operability Test
            Channel Calibration
Not recorded
  24519-101 R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I       10/21/86
14895-101 ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice
            P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration
9/27/86
  24519-103 R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I       1/07/87
14896-101 ECCS Check Valve Cold Shutdown Inservice
            P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration
9/22/86
  24597-1   Containment Cooling Units 5, 6,             Not recorded
14980-111 Diesel Generator Operability Test
            7 & 8 - Condensate Detection L-17094
1/09/87
  24626-101 Containment Vent Effluent Air Particulate       1/08/87
14980-1
            Monitor 1RE-2565A
Diesel Generator Test
  24681-101 Meteorological Station 10M Wind Direction     10/30/86
Not recorded
            Channel Calibration
(Fuel Oil Sampling for Water)
  24684-C   Meteorological Station 60M Wind Speed       Not recorded
24342-1
            Channel Calibration
Pressurizer Level Control F-121
  24688-101 Meteorological Station 10M Ambient and         9/12/86
Not recorded
            and 10-60M Delta Temperature Channel
Channel Calibration
            Calibration
24519-101
  24737-101 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903           12/04/86
R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I
  24737-102 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903           12/04/86
10/21/86
  24739-101 Peak Acceleration AXR-19910                     1/02/87
P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration
  24806-101 Refueling Water Storage Tank Level L-990       1/15/86
24519-103
            ACOT and Channel Calibration
R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I
  24840-101 Containment Pressure High Transmitters         1/02/87
1/07/87
            RTT Sensors PT-934
P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration
  28210-101 Main Steam Line Safety Valve Test               4/86
24597-1
  thru 120
Containment Cooling Units 5, 6,
  28211-101 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test                   2/20/86
Not recorded
  28211-102 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test                   1/09/86
7 & 8 - Condensate Detection L-17094
  28215-101 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010A             3/04/86
24626-101 Containment Vent Effluent Air Particulate
  28215-102 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-80108             2/27/86
1/08/87
  28215-103 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010C             3/05/86
Monitor 1RE-2565A
  28290-101 Containment Spray Nozzle Flow Test                 N/A
24681-101 Meteorological Station 10M Wind Direction
  28711-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning           9/08/85
10/30/86
  28711-102 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning           9/09/85
Channel Calibration
  28712-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Piping Pressure Test           3/23/84
24684-C
  28820-C   Battery Charger Load Test                   Not recorded
Meteorological Station 60M Wind Speed
Not recorded
Channel Calibration
24688-101 Meteorological Station 10M Ambient and
9/12/86
and 10-60M Delta Temperature Channel
Calibration
24737-101 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903
12/04/86
24737-102 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903
12/04/86
24739-101 Peak Acceleration AXR-19910
1/02/87
24806-101 Refueling Water Storage Tank Level L-990
1/15/86
ACOT and Channel Calibration
24840-101 Containment Pressure High Transmitters
1/02/87
RTT Sensors PT-934
28210-101 Main Steam Line Safety Valve Test
4/86
thru 120
28211-101 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test
2/20/86
28211-102 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test
1/09/86
28215-101 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010A
3/04/86
28215-102 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-80108
2/27/86
28215-103 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010C
3/05/86
28290-101 Containment Spray Nozzle Flow Test
N/A
28711-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning
9/08/85
28711-102 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning
9/09/85
28712-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Piping Pressure Test
3/23/84
28820-C
Battery Charger Load Test
Not recorded
l
l
                .                               .   _-
.
.
_-


!                                 9
!
9
l
l
  28905-C     Motor Operated Valve Thermal Overload         Not recorded
28905-C
              and Bypass 18 Month Test
Motor Operated Valve Thermal Overload
  28910-102 Class 1E 18 Mo. Battery Inspection                 12/08/86
Not recorded
              and Maintenance
and Bypass 18 Month Test
  28912-102 Class IE Quarterly Battery Inspection               1/02/87
28910-102 Class 1E 18 Mo. Battery Inspection
              and Maintenance
12/08/86
  54708-101 Containment Isolation and Containment               10/14/86
and Maintenance
              Ventilation Isolation - Manual
28912-102 Class IE Quarterly Battery Inspection
              Initiation
1/02/87
  54820-101 Train "A" SI Pump Response Time Test                 9/28/86
and Maintenance
  54822-101 Train "B" SI Pump Response Time Test                 9/28/86
54708-101 Containment Isolation and Containment
  54825-101 Train "B" CCWP Response Time Test                   9/25/86
10/14/86
  The following items were identified during the inspection:
Ventilation Isolation - Manual
  (1) On procedures 28910-101,102,103, and 104, Class 1E 18-Month
Initiation
      Battery Inspection and Maintenance, the inspector noted that
54820-101 Train "A" SI Pump Response Time Test
      the recorded data indicated that intercell resistance on
9/28/86
      rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers exceeded the Technical
54822-101 Train "B" SI Pump Response Time Test
      Specification requirement of 50 X 10-6 ohms. The Surveillance
9/28/86
      Task Sheets (STS), which listed the TS requirement as part of
54825-101 Train "B" CCWP Response Time Test
      the acceptance criteria, had in each case been signed off as
9/25/86
      meeting acceptance criteria. The licensee was questioned about
The following items were identified during the inspection:
      the signoffs.   The licensee stated that the engineer had signed
(1) On procedures 28910-101,102,103, and 104, Class 1E 18-Month
      off the step because the excess resistance was attributed to the
Battery Inspection and Maintenance, the inspector noted that
      cable length between the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers.
the recorded data indicated that intercell resistance on
      The inspector requested the evaluation of the cable resistance
rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers exceeded the Technical
      value. The licensee stated that an evaluation had not been
Specification requirement of 50 X 10-6 ohms.
      performed. Since the cable resistance had not been determined
The Surveillance
      and subtracted from the total resistance, the value of the cell
Task Sheets (STS), which listed the TS requirement as part of
      to cell resistance was not known.
the acceptance criteria, had in each case been signed off as
      Procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program, Step 4.5.4.1,
meeting acceptance criteria.
      requires an independent reviewer to confirm that test results
The licensee was questioned about
      satisfy acceptance criteria.     The reviewer signed the STS
the signoffs.
      indicating that the acceptance criteria were met.
The licensee stated that the engineer had signed
      10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities
off the step because the excess resistance was attributed to the
      affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
cable length between the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers.
      instructions, procedures, or drawings.       This requirement is
The inspector requested the evaluation of the cable resistance
      implemented by Section 17.2, Operations Quality Assurance
value.
      Program, of the FSAR. The failure to follow procedure 00404-C
The licensee stated that an evaluation had not been
      to confirm that test results met the acceptance criteria for
performed.
      the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers on the vital batteries
Since the cable resistance had not been determined
      is identified as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
and subtracted from the total resistance, the value of the cell
                                                                          --
to cell resistance was not known.
Procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program, Step 4.5.4.1,
requires an independent reviewer to confirm that test results
satisfy acceptance criteria.
The reviewer signed the STS
indicating that the acceptance criteria were met.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities
affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
instructions, procedures, or drawings.
This requirement is
implemented by Section 17.2, Operations Quality Assurance
Program, of the FSAR.
The failure to follow procedure 00404-C
to confirm that test results met the acceptance criteria for
the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers on the vital batteries
is identified as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
--


          . . .-                                     .     -
. . .-
                                                  10
.
                    (2) On data sheet 2 of procedure 14423-106, Source Range NIS Analog
-
                        Channel Operational Test, performed on January 14, 1987, the
10
                        normal reading taken from the Neutron Level Drawer Meter
(2) On data sheet 2 of procedure 14423-106, Source Range NIS Analog
                        exceeded the upper limit values given on the data sheet. A
Channel Operational Test, performed on January 14, 1987, the
                        note on the data sheet directs the test performer to add the
normal reading taken from the Neutron Level Drawer Meter
                        pre-test indication on meter NI-101 to the upper limit values
exceeded the upper limit values given on the data sheet.
                        for specific switch positions given on the data sheet.       This
A
                        would raise the upper limit.       Nowhere on the- data sheet,
note on the data sheet directs the test performer to add the
                        however, is the reading on NI-101 documented.     This makes the
pre-test indication on meter NI-101 to the upper limit values
                        true upper limit unclear and makes it appear the procedure is
for specific switch positions given on the data sheet.
                        unsatisfactory when in fact it is satisfactory.     The licensee
This
                        agreed to change the procedure to include the reading on NI-101
would raise the upper limit.
                        on the data sheets.
Nowhere on the- data sheet,
                        No violations or deviations were identified.
however, is the reading on NI-101 documented.
                    (3) On procedure 14423-106, the High Flux at Shutdown (HFAS) set-
This makes the
                        point was not checked. A note on the proceddre stated that the
true upper limit unclear and makes it appear the procedure is
  i                     HFAS setpoint would be set after two fuel bundles were loaded
unsatisfactory when in fact it is satisfactory.
t
The licensee
                        in the reactor vessel.     The inspector questioned the licensee
agreed to change the procedure to include the reading on NI-101
                        on the triggering mechanism for establishirg the HFAS setpoint.
on the data sheets.
                        The licensee stated it was part of startup test procedure
No violations or deviations were identified.
                        #1-500-01, Initial Fuel Load Test Sequence.       The inspector
(3) On procedure 14423-106, the High Flux at Shutdown (HFAS) set-
                        verified this and had no further comments.
point was not checked.
1                       No violations or deviations were identified.
A note on the proceddre stated that the
                    (4) On procedure 14895, ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice Test,
i
                        completed September 17, 1986, required flow rates which were
HFAS setpoint would be set after two fuel bundles were loaded
                        marked "LATER" had been changed to specific values without a
t
                        proper procedure revision.     This item had also been identified
in the reactor vessel.
                        by the licensee's QA audits and was being followed by QA.
The inspector questioned the licensee
                        No violations or deviations were identified.
on the triggering mechanism for establishirg the HFAS setpoint.
                    (5) Procedure 14811, Boric Acid Transfer Pumps and Discharge Check
The licensee stated it was part of startup test procedure
                        Valves Inservice Test, had been identified as not acceptable by
#1-500-01, Initial Fuel Load Test Sequence.
                        the IST group but NSAC was showing the surveillance to be
The inspector
                        acceptable. This item was also identified in a QA audit and
verified this and had no further comments.
                        was being followed by QA.
1
                        No violations or deviations were identified.
No violations or deviations were identified.
(4) On procedure 14895, ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice Test,
completed September 17, 1986, required flow rates which were
marked "LATER" had been changed to specific values without a
proper procedure revision.
This item had also been identified
by the licensee's QA audits and was being followed by QA.
No violations or deviations were identified.
(5) Procedure 14811, Boric Acid Transfer Pumps and Discharge Check
Valves Inservice Test, had been identified as not acceptable by
the IST group but NSAC was showing the surveillance to be
acceptable.
This item was also identified in a QA audit and
was being followed by QA.
No violations or deviations were identified.
(6) The inspector questioned the absence of dates on a number of
'
'
                    (6) The inspector questioned the absence of dates on a number of
Task Sheets attached to active surveillances.
                        Task Sheets attached to active surveillances. The licensee
The licensee
                        provided verification that the problem was corrected and the
provided verification that the problem was corrected and the
!                       surveillance tracking system was working as delineated in
!
                        procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.       The inspector
surveillance tracking system was working as delineated in
                        had no further questions.
procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.
                        No violations or deviations were identified.
The inspector
had no further questions.
No violations or deviations were identified.
l
l
    .- -
.-
        .       ._ --                                                                   . _ _ _
-
.
._ --
.
..
.
__ _ _
. _ _ _


                                  11
11
  (7) Surveillance procedure 14896-101, Revision 0, which was
(7) Surveillance procedure 14896-101, Revision 0,
        completed and reviewed by the licensee on January 12, 1987,
which was
        was not revised in accordance with the outstanding TCP, No.
completed and reviewed by the licensee on January 12, 1987,
        14896-187-1.   The flow rate criterion on Data Sheet 1, for
was not revised in accordance with the outstanding TCP, No.
        the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) check valve cold
14896-187-1.
        shutdown inservice test, was not changed from 3,000 gpm to
The flow rate criterion on Data Sheet 1, for
        3,788 gpm, as required by this TCP nor was another TCP
the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) check valve cold
        written to change the flow rate criterion.
shutdown inservice test, was not changed from 3,000 gpm to
        No violations or deviations were identified.
3,788 gpm, as required by this TCP nor was another TCP
  (8) The inspectors noted that items 1, 4, 5, and 7 raised questions
written to change the flow rate criterion.
        about the reviews required to assure that acceptance criteria
No violations or deviations were identified.
        were met.   The review of the licensee's procedures to assure
(8) The inspectors noted that items 1, 4, 5, and 7 raised questions
        that adequate administrative controls exist for review of
about the reviews required to assure that acceptance criteria
        acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance
were met.
        criteria are met is identified as inspector followup item
The review of the licensee's procedures to assure
        424/87-01-02.
that adequate administrative controls exist for review of
        No violations or deviations were identified.
acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance
b. Field Review of Surveillance Instructions
criteria are met is identified as inspector followup item
  The inspectors performed a field review of surveillance procedures
424/87-01-02.
  by observation of surveillances in progress or by walkdown of
No violations or deviations were identified.
  procedures in the field. The following concerns were identified:
b.
  (1) The inspector observed chemistry technicians dismantling a
Field Review of Surveillance Instructions
        radiation monitor identified as 1RE-12444C. When the inspector
The inspectors performed a field review of surveillance procedures
        asked to review the MWO under which the technicians were
by observation of surveillances in progress or by walkdown of
        performing the work, they replied that they were dismantling
procedures in the field. The following concerns were identified:
        the monitor via surveillance procedure 34223-C, Rev. 1, Channel
(1) The inspector observed chemistry technicians dismantling a
        Calibration of the Gaseous Effluent Monitors.     The inspector
radiation monitor identified as 1RE-12444C.
        reviewed the procedure and associated attachments to determine
When the inspector
        if the procedure was being followed properly. The inspector
asked to review the MWO under which the technicians were
        determined that the technicians had not obtained the signature
performing the work, they replied that they were dismantling
        of the shift supervisor prior to performing work or the
the monitor via surveillance procedure 34223-C, Rev. 1, Channel
        signature for review of QC holdpoints.
Calibration of the Gaseous Effluent Monitors.
        The inspector noted that, step 5.1 of procedure 34223-C,
The inspector
        Prerequisites, states, " Ensure a Quality Control (QC) represent-
reviewed the procedure and associated attachments to determine
        ative has signed the checklist indicating a QC review of the
if the procedure was being followed properly.
        procedure for hold points. If hold points are indicated, notify
The inspector
        QC prior to starting." Additionally, step 5.2 states, " Notify
determined that the technicians had not obtained the signature
        the Operations Shift Supervisor, or his designee, of the work
of the shift supervisor prior to performing work or the
        to be performed and obtain his signature authorization."
signature for review of QC holdpoints.
        Neither of these signatures had been obtained. When the lead
The inspector noted that, step 5.1 of procedure 34223-C,
        technician was questioned on these steps, the technician stated
Prerequisites, states, " Ensure a Quality Control (QC) represent-
        that verbal approval had been obtained from the Shift Supervisor
ative has signed the checklist indicating a QC review of the
        to perform the work.
procedure for hold points.
                                                                          - .
If hold points are indicated, notify
QC prior to starting." Additionally, step 5.2 states, " Notify
the Operations Shift Supervisor, or his designee, of the work
to be performed and obtain his signature authorization."
Neither of these signatures had been obtained.
When the lead
technician was questioned on these steps, the technician stated
that verbal approval had been obtained from the Shift Supervisor
to perform the work.
-
.


                            12
12
  10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires, in part, that
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires, in part, that
  activities affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with
activities affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with
  documented procedures.     VEGP FSAR, section 17.2, Operations
documented procedures.
  Quality Assurance Program, also requires that activities
VEGP FSAR, section 17.2, Operations
  affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
Quality Assurance Program, also requires that activities
  procedures. The activities described above were not accom-
affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
  plished in accordance with procedure 34223-C in that the
procedures.
  signature of a QC representative had not been obtained for the
The activities described above were not accom-
  hold point review, indicating that the review was not accom-
plished in accordance with procedure 34223-C in that the
  plished, and the signature of the Shift Supervisor had not been
signature of a QC representative had not been obtained for the
  obtained to authorize performance of the work. The inspector
hold point review, indicating that the review was not accom-
  later verified that the Shift Supervisor had provided verbal
plished, and the signature of the Shift Supervisor had not been
  approval. The failure to follow procedure 34223-C is identified
obtained to authorize performance of the work.
  as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
The inspector
  During the review, the inspector questioned whether or not the
later verified that the Shift Supervisor had provided verbal
  radiation monitor was seismically and/or environmentally quali-
approval.
  fied equipment and if provisions existed in the procedure to
The failure to follow procedure 34223-C is identified
  maintain these qualifications.     The inspector determined that
as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
  Vogtle administrative procedure 00350-C, required that work
During the review, the inspector questioned whether or not the
  performed on seismically or environmentally qualified equipment
radiation monitor was seismically and/or environmentally quali-
  be done under the control of an MWO.     The inspector questioned
fied equipment and if provisions existed in the procedure to
  the use of surveillance procedures to control removal and
maintain these qualifications.
  restoration of seismic and/or environmentally qualified
The inspector determined that
  equipment.     Resolution of this issue was identified as
Vogtle administrative procedure 00350-C, required that work
  IFI 424/87-01-04.
performed on seismically or environmentally qualified equipment
  During subsequent inspections, the inspector was informed by
be done under the control of an MWO.
  the licensee that radiation monitor 1RE-12444C was seismically
The inspector questioned
  qualified and the technicians were not taking any special
the use of surveillance procedures to control removal and
  precautions to maintain the equipment qualification.       The
restoration of seismic and/or environmentally qualified
  licensee generated Deficiency Reports (DRs) 1-87-0203, on the
equipment.
  disassembly of monitor RE-12444-C; and,1-82-0204, on detector
Resolution of this issue was identified as
  removal and reinstallation for monitors RE-0020A and RE-00208.
IFI 424/87-01-04.
  A Request for Engineering Review (RER) was written for problem
During subsequent inspections, the inspector was informed by
  resolution and MW0s were written to cover the remaining work.
the licensee that radiation monitor 1RE-12444C was seismically
  Regarding the concern of whether or not the EQ of the monitors
qualified and the technicians were not taking any special
  was compromised by the routine disassembly and reassembly, the
precautions to maintain the equipment qualification.
  inspector reviewed the system description 9002-DRMS-002 to
The
  ascertain what is required to maintain EQ. The system descrip-
licensee generated Deficiency Reports (DRs) 1-87-0203, on the
  tion indicates that no specific removal or replacement proce-
disassembly of monitor RE-12444-C; and,1-82-0204, on detector
  dures are required. Nomal safety precautions and general shop
removal and reinstallation for monitors RE-0020A and RE-00208.
  techniques were adequate for this task. The portion of the
A Request for Engineering Review (RER) was written for problem
  monitor that could degrade the EQ of the monitor is never
resolution and MW0s were written to cover the remaining work.
  opened for these routine calibrations. Since these calibration
Regarding the concern of whether or not the EQ of the monitors
  activitics do not directly affect the seismically sensitive
was compromised by the routine disassembly and reassembly, the
  areas of the equipment, the original procedure was not clearly
inspector reviewed the system description 9002-DRMS-002 to
  in violation of administrative procedure 00350-C, which requires
ascertain what is required to maintain EQ. The system descrip-
  MW0s to be written for work performed on seismic or environ-
tion indicates that no specific removal or replacement proce-
  mentally qualified instrumentation.     However, the licensee
dures are required.
Nomal safety precautions and general shop
techniques were adequate for this task.
The portion of the
monitor that could degrade the EQ of the monitor is never
opened for these routine calibrations.
Since these calibration
activitics do not directly affect the seismically sensitive
areas of the equipment, the original procedure was not clearly
in violation of administrative procedure 00350-C, which requires
MW0s to be written for work performed on seismic or environ-
mentally qualified instrumentation.
However, the licensee
i
i
.
.


                            13
13
,
,
  stated that all procedures that affect radiation monitors that
stated that all procedures that affect radiation monitors that
  have seismic and/or environmental concerns are being reviewed
have seismic and/or environmental concerns are being reviewed
  and revised as deemed appropriate.
and revised as deemed appropriate.
  Procedure 39350-C, Initial Calibration of Gaseous Process
Procedure 39350-C, Initial Calibration of Gaseous Process
  Monitors, was written to require an MWO for the removal or
Monitors, was written to require an MWO for the removal or
  reinstallation of any components on radiation monitor RE-2562.
reinstallation of any components on radiation monitor RE-2562.
  This system is seismically qualified per FSAR Table 11.5.2-1.
This system is seismically qualified per FSAR Table 11.5.2-1.
  Other calibration procedures will be revised similarly in the
Other calibration procedures will be revised similarly in the
  near future to cover all of the monitors in this table.     The
near future to cover all of the monitors in this table.
  inspector was concerned that simply placing this caution in the
The
  calibration procedure would not guarantee that a technician
inspector was concerned that simply placing this caution in the
  would not start with the procedure for the removal of the
calibration procedure would not guarantee that a technician
  detector; then use the procedure for the calibration and find
would not start with the procedure for the removal of the
  out that an MWO was required to implement precautions so as not
detector; then use the procedure for the calibration and find
  to jeopardize the EQ of the equipment.
out that an MWO was required to implement precautions so as not
  The inspector then reviewed the licensees EQ program in order to
to jeopardize the EQ of the equipment.
  determine whether or not it provided adequate assurance that EQ
The inspector then reviewed the licensees EQ program in order to
  is maintained. The inspector interviewed personnel from the
determine whether or not it provided adequate assurance that EQ
  Maintenance and Engineering departments as well as the Work
is maintained.
  Planning Group. The EQ program is implemented under procedure
The inspector interviewed personnel from the
  20009-C, Rev. 1.     The inspector found the procedure to be
Maintenance and Engineering departments as well as the Work
  satisfactory.   Any equipment that must be EQ had an associated
Planning Group.
  package of information called the Environmental Qualification
The EQ program is implemented under procedure
  Data Package (EQDP).   These EQDP's were numbered and controlled
20009-C, Rev.
1.
The inspector found the procedure to be
satisfactory.
Any equipment that must be EQ had an associated
package of information called the Environmental Qualification
Data Package (EQDP).
These EQDP's were numbered and controlled
documents. Each package was divided into nine parts. The parts
'
'
  documents. Each package was divided into nine parts. The parts
are:
  are:
(a) EQDP equipment identification list
  (a) EQDP equipment identification list
(b) Environmental summary sheet
  (b) Environmental summary sheet
(c) NUREG 0588 Checklist
  (c) NUREG 0588 Checklist
(d) Master listing - seismic
  (d) Master listing - seismic
(e) Seismic qualification and recorder data sheets
  (e) Seismic qualification and recorder data sheets
(f) Calculations
  (f) Calculations
(g) Maintenance / replacement information
  (g) Maintenance / replacement information
(h) EQ design change signoff form
  (h) EQ design change signoff form
(1) Miscellaneous information
  (1) Miscellaneous information
The inspector reviewed four EQDP's: Relief Valves; Radiation
  The inspector reviewed four EQDP's: Relief Valves; Radiation
Monitors; Limitorque Valves; and Rosemount Transmitters.
  Monitors; Limitorque Valves; and Rosemount Transmitters. The
The
  inspector determined that the packages were comprehensive and
inspector determined that the packages were comprehensive and
  found the information easily accessible.
found the information easily accessible.
                                                                    . .
.
.


                                                                                        _
_
                                    14
14
            The inspector reviewed three procedures to determine if the EQDP
The inspector reviewed three procedures to determine if the EQDP
            information had been implemented into these procedures. These
information had been implemented into these procedures.
            procedures were: 22402-C, Rosemount Transmitter Removal and
These
'          Reinstallation; 28211-C, Relief Valve Test Procedure; and
procedures were: 22402-C, Rosemount Transmitter Removal and
            25240-C, General Bolted Flange Torquing Procedure. All of
Reinstallation; 28211-C, Relief Valve Test Procedure; and
            these procedures compared favorably with their respective EQDP.
'
            The inspector reviewed the licensee's Nuclear Plant Maintenance
25240-C, General Bolted Flange Torquing Procedure.
            Information System (NPMIS) to observe how EQ equipment was
All of
            flagged to prevent compromise of the EQ requirements. All
these procedures compared favorably with their respective EQDP.
            equipment had a safety classification that was reviewed whenever
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Nuclear Plant Maintenance
            an MWO was written against the equipment. In accordance with
Information System (NPMIS) to observe how EQ equipment was
            Regulatory Guide 1.60, Design Response Spectra for Seismic
flagged to prevent compromise of the EQ requirements.
            Design of Nuclear Power Plants, the licensee uses a project
All
            classification matrix (Table C13-1 from the VEGP Project
equipment had a safety classification that was reviewed whenever
            Reference Manual) that delineates what safety classification
an MWO was written against the equipment.
            code is used to designate safety related equipment and whether
In accordance with
            the equipment is EQ or not. All of the equipment with a safety
Regulatory Guide 1.60, Design Response Spectra for Seismic
            classification that indicates either seismic or environmental
Design of Nuclear Power Plants, the licensee uses a project
            qualification must be reviewed by QC. In addition, the Work
classification matrix (Table C13-1 from the VEGP Project
            Planning Group engineer and the Environmental Qualification
Reference Manual) that delineates what safety classification
            Group engineer must both sign off on any EQ equipment that
code is used to designate safety related equipment and whether
            all proper reviews have been performed, the EQDP had been
the equipment is EQ or not. All of the equipment with a safety
            referenced, and the installation / replacement documents are
classification that indicates either seismic or environmental
            accepta,ble.
qualification must be reviewed by QC.
            Finally, the inspector reviewed constructica documents to
In addition, the Work
            determine if the equipment had been installed correctly.         The
Planning Group engineer and the Environmental Qualification
            most important aspect of the seismic qualification of the
Group engineer must both sign off on any EQ equipment that
            radiation monitors is the e, led upon which they are mounted
all proper reviews have been performed, the EQDP had been
            during normal operation. All seismic modeling of the equipment
referenced, and the installation / replacement documents are
            was performed assuming that the sled was instaited the way that
accepta,ble.
            it was designed. The inspu, tor found that probNms had occurred
Finally, the inspector reviewed constructica documents to
            with the installation of the sled.       These are detailed in
determine if the equipment had been installed correctly.
            Readiness Review finding M-13.     Correspondence from F. B. Marsh
The
            of Bechtel Western Power Division to J. A. Bailey of Southern
most important aspect of the seismic qualification of the
            Company Services discussed the specifics and stated that the
radiation monitors is the
            deficiency was not reportable under the rules of 10CFR 50.55(e).
e, led upon which they are mounted
            A Deviation Report (DR) CD-9158 was generated on December 19,
during normal operation.
            1987 to address and disposition the discrepant condition. The
All seismic modeling of the equipment
            DR, which details the evaluation that determined the condition
was performed assuming that the sled was instaited the way that
            was ratisfactory, appeared adequate to the inspector. The DR
it was designed. The inspu, tor found that probNms had occurred
            had not been sent to QC for approval.
with the installation of the sled.
            Overall, the inspector found the licensee's EQ program to be
These are detailed in
            satisfactory and in some aspects, exemplary. IFI 424/87-01-03
Readiness Review finding M-13.
            will remain open pending review of the revisions of all radia-
Correspondence from F. B. Marsh
            tion monitor procedures that affect those monitors listed in
of Bechtel Western Power Division to J. A. Bailey of Southern
            FSAR Table 11.5.2-1, and the closing out of CD-9158.
Company Services discussed the specifics and stated that the
deficiency was not reportable under the rules of 10CFR 50.55(e).
A Deviation Report (DR) CD-9158 was generated on December 19,
1987 to address and disposition the discrepant condition.
The
DR, which details the evaluation that determined the condition
was ratisfactory, appeared adequate to the inspector.
The DR
had not been sent to QC for approval.
Overall, the inspector found the licensee's EQ program to be
satisfactory and in some aspects, exemplary.
IFI 424/87-01-03
will remain open pending review of the revisions of all radia-
tion monitor procedures that affect those monitors listed in
FSAR Table 11.5.2-1, and the closing out of CD-9158.
,
,
  __ _ _
__
          e -     .- , -
_
                                                . ,     _ _ . .       -r._    _ , , -
_
e
-
.- ,
-
.
,
_ _ . .
-r.
_ , , -


                                  15
15
    (2) Sections of procedure 24519-1, Rev. 2, Reactor Coolant Pressure
(2) Sections of procedure 24519-1, Rev. 2, Reactor Coolant Pressure
        (Wide Range) Protection I 1P-405 Analog Channel Operational
(Wide Range) Protection I 1P-405 Analog Channel Operational
        Test and Channel Calibration, which apply to the analog channel
Test and Channel Calibration, which apply to the analog channel
        operational test using the manual system, were observed. The
operational test using the manual system, were observed.
        operational test failed.     As-found readings fell outside the
The
        expected band.     Section 4.20, Summing Amplifier Card Field
operational test failed.
        Calibration, of procedure 23300-C, Rev.1, Field Calibration
As-found readings fell outside the
        Procedure, was performed and the appropriate sections of
expected band.
        procedure 24519-1 were repeated.
Section 4.20, Summing Amplifier Card Field
        No violations or deviations were identified.
Calibration, of procedure 23300-C, Rev.1, Field Calibration
    (3) An inspection of portions of the field performance of procedure
Procedure, was performed and the appropriate sections of
        24634-1, CR Air Intake Process Radio Gas Monitor Analog Channel
procedure 24519-1 were repeated.
        Operational Test & Channel Calibration, and procedure 24623-1,
No violations or deviations were identified.
        Containment Low Range Area Monitor Analog Channel Operation Test
(3) An inspection of portions of the field performance of procedure
        and Channel Calibration, was performed. The inspector had no
24634-1, CR Air Intake Process Radio Gas Monitor Analog Channel
        comments.
Operational Test & Channel Calibration, and procedure 24623-1,
        The inspector reviewed procedure 24183-1, Rev.1 Fuel Handling
Containment Low Range Area Monitor Analog Channel Operation Test
        Building Effluent Radiogas Monitor, ARX-2533. The inspector
and Channel Calibration, was performed.
        noted an inconsistency betwcen the procedure and panel in that
The inspector had no
        labeling for a connector was IAJ3 versus J3 on the panel. An
comments.
        LED which was unmarked on the remote / control box, did not light
The inspector reviewed procedure 24183-1, Rev.1 Fuel Handling
        as indicated by the procedure.     No LED was provided on unit
Building Effluent Radiogas Monitor, ARX-2533.
        IRT-1005 as indicated in step 4.1.3.6.b.
The inspector
        The inspector reviewed procedure 24756-1, Rev. 2, Steam
noted an inconsistency betwcen the procedure and panel in that
        Generator Level (Narrow Range) Protection Channel II, IL-553.
labeling for a connector was IAJ3 versus J3 on the panel.
        The inspector noted that the location of equipment was
An
        determined using an out of date drawing due to the time required
LED which was unmarked on the remote / control box, did not light
        to pull new drawings.
as indicated by the procedure.
        After this walkdown, the inspector encouraged the licensee to
No LED was provided on unit
        evaluate the distribution of drawings from Document Control.
IRT-1005 as indicated in step 4.1.3.6.b.
        Requests for drawings by the inspector to the technicians, who
The inspector reviewed procedure 24756-1, Rev.
        were performing work in the plant, typically resulted in a
2, Steam
        50-minute wait in Document Control. The inspector was concerned
Generator Level (Narrow Range) Protection Channel II, IL-553.
        that the opportunity to use obsolete information would be more
The inspector noted that the location of equipment was
        likely if the people who needed the information consistently
determined using an out of date drawing due to the time required
        found obtaining new drawings difficult. Prompt distribution can
to pull new drawings.
        greatly enhance compliance with drawing and document control
After this walkdown, the inspector encouraged the licensee to
,
evaluate the distribution of drawings from Document Control.
        requirements. During two surveillances, which were witnessed by
Requests for drawings by the inspector to the technicians, who
  I
were performing work in the plant, typically resulted in a
        the inspector, technicians spent approximately 3 hours to find
50-minute wait in Document Control. The inspector was concerned
        equipment that was either erroneously listed in the procedure
that the opportunity to use obsolete information would be more
        (e.g., local indication for radiation area monitor) or moved in
likely if the people who needed the information consistently
        a modification (e.g., a steam generator level transmitter). The
found obtaining new drawings difficult. Prompt distribution can
greatly enhance compliance with drawing and document control
requirements. During two surveillances, which were witnessed by
,
the inspector, technicians spent approximately 3 hours to find
I
equipment that was either erroneously listed in the procedure
(e.g., local indication for radiation area monitor) or moved in
a modification (e.g., a steam generator level transmitter). The
inspector asked the technicians in both instances, after a
'
'
        inspector asked the technicians in both instances, after a
twenty-minute search, if it would be more expedient to check
        twenty-minute search, if it would be more expedient to check
the drawings.
        the drawings.     In both cases, the technicians thought the
In both cases, the technicians thought the
        equipment would be located any moment and the time spent to
equipment would be located any moment and the time spent to
        obtain a drawing was unnecessary.
obtain a drawing was unnecessary.


                                      16
16
  .
.
i
The inspector reviewed procedure 24634-1, Rer.1, Control Room
'
i
i
          '
Air Intake (1RE-12116) Process Radio Gas Monitor.
            The inspector reviewed procedure 24634-1, Rer.1, Control Room
During the
    i
surveillance, remote control test box was removed.
            Air Intake (1RE-12116) Process Radio Gas Monitor. During the
This item
            surveillance, remote control test box was removed. This item
was identified to the licensee as part of IFI 424/87-01-06.
            was identified to the licensee as part of IFI 424/87-01-06.
The equipment was later determined to be used only for testing
            The equipment was later determined to be used only for testing
,1
      ,1   and did not affect the operation of the safety related monitor;
and did not affect the operation of the safety related monitor;
        '
however, the Readout Control Box (RCB) was removed and used to
            however, the Readout Control Box (RCB) was removed and used to
'
            perform calibrations on other monitors without any tracking,
perform calibrations on other monitors without any tracking,
            i.e., no MWO was issued. Deficiency Report 1-87-161 was written
i.e., no MWO was issued. Deficiency Report 1-87-161 was written
            to document this occurrence and engineering report 87-0036
to document this occurrence and engineering report 87-0036
            was generated to perform an evaluation of the incident. The
was generated to perform an evaluation of the incident.
            engineering report determined that the RCB is interchangeable on
The
            the monitors and there is no problem with using them in this
engineering report determined that the RCB is interchangeable on
            manner. Still, the removal of the RCB does require a MW0 and
the monitors and there is no problem with using them in this
            the licensee showed the inspector a procedure that cautioned
manner.
            personnel performing this action with a RCB to generate a MW0.
Still, the removal of the RCB does require a MW0 and
            The procedure was a draft copy. Until the procedure is revised,
the licensee showed the inspector a procedure that cautioned
            this part of IFI 424/87-01-06 will remain open.
personnel performing this action with a RCB to generate a MW0.
            The inspector also noted during plant walkdowns that an ambient
The procedure was a draft copy. Until the procedure is revised,
            temperature difference of 8 to 10 existed between the Control
this part of IFI 424/87-01-06 will remain open.
            Building normal air conditioning room temperature gauge and the
The inspector also noted during plant walkdowns that an ambient
            ESF air conditioning room temperature gauge,1-1539-TIC-13150
temperature difference of 8 to 10 existed between the Control
            and 1-TSH-13151.     The inspector requested the licensee to
Building normal air conditioning room temperature gauge and the
            investigate if the instruments were operable. In a letter dated
ESF air conditioning room temperature gauge,1-1539-TIC-13150
            January 12, 1987, the licensee stated that an investigation had
and 1-TSH-13151.
            revealed that the instruments served separate functions, i.e.,
The inspector requested the licensee to
            monitored different rooms.     However, as a result of this
investigate if the instruments were operable.
            finding, the inspector later determined that the licensee had
In a letter dated
            written maintenance work order (MW0) 18700997 to correct the
January 12, 1987, the licensee stated that an investigation had
            discrepancy between these instruments, since both instruments
revealed that the instruments served separate functions,
            measured the same ambient room temperature. This is considered
i.e.,
            acceptable; however, the action did not correspond to the
monitored different rooms.
            January 12, 1987 response. No followup is considered necessary
However, as a result of this
            for this item.
finding, the inspector later determined that the licensee had
            Other concerns involving emergency lighting which was out in
written maintenance work order (MW0) 18700997 to correct the
            a stairwell, the failure of personnel to close fire doors
discrepancy between these instruments, since both instruments
            and a question on the wire bend radius of cable at location
measured the same ambient room temperature. This is considered
            A-1813-M3-027 were promptly answered or corrected by the
acceptable; however, the action did not correspond to the
            licensee. The wire bend radius was determined to be within
January 12, 1987 response.
            specification.     These concerns had also been identified as
No followup is considered necessary
            part of IFI 424/87-01-06. These concerns are considered closed.
for this item.
            No violaticns or deviations were identified.
Other concerns involving emergency lighting which was out in
                                                                              !
a stairwell, the failure of personnel to close fire doors
                                                                            1
and a question on the wire bend radius of cable at location
A-1813-M3-027 were promptly answered or corrected by the
licensee.
The wire bend radius was determined to be within
specification.
These concerns had also been identified as
part of IFI 424/87-01-06. These concerns are considered closed.
No violaticns or deviations were identified.
1


                                                                                  -       - _ - -
-
            -    .
.
                                              17
-
  8. Maintenance Program and Procedure Review (42451B, 357438)
- _ - -
    During previous inspections, reviews had been conducted of the administra-
17
    tive controls for plant maintenance, the technical adequacy of maintenance
8.
    procedures and the implementation of the maintenance program. The review
Maintenance Program and Procedure Review (42451B, 357438)
    included an assessment of the corrective maintenance program; an assess-
During previous inspections, reviews had been conducted of the administra-
    ment of the preventative maintenance program; a review of equipment
tive controls for plant maintenance, the technical adequacy of maintenance
    control including the removal and restoration of equipment, equipment
procedures and the implementation of the maintenance program. The review
    status tracking and functional testing requirements; verification of
included an assessment of the corrective maintenance program; an assess-
    control of special processes, housekeeping and system cleanliness; and,
ment of the preventative maintenance program; a review of equipment
    document review and field verification of the implementation of the
control including the removal and restoration of equipment, equipment
    maintenance program.     The program had not been fully implemented under
status tracking and functional testing requirements; verification of
    the operational quality assurance program at that time. Followup on the
control of special processes, housekeeping and system cleanliness; and,
    implementation of the program was identified as IFI 424/86-117-24.
document review and field verification of the implementation of the
    During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed procedure 00350-C,
maintenance program.
    Maintenance Program, Rev. 5, dated December 3,1986. This procedure
The program had not been fully implemented under
    was the administrative procedure which governed maintenance activities
the operational quality assurance program at that time.
    during operation.       Additionally, the inspectors witnessed several
Followup on the
    maintenance activities in progress including the processing of mainte-
implementation of the program was identified as IFI 424/86-117-24.
    nance work orders (MWO) in accordance with the requirements of 00350-C.
During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed procedure 00350-C,
    The inspectors also reviewed completed work packages that were accom-
Maintenance Program, Rev. 5, dated December 3,1986.
    plished under the operational QA program. The inspectors verified that
This procedure
    the licensee had implemented its planned maintenance program. Based on
was the administrative procedure which governed maintenance activities
    the review, IFI 424/86-117-24 is closed.
during operation.
    The field review consisted of observing 14 MW0s which addressed various
Additionally, the inspectors witnessed several
    aspects of plant maintenance. The inspector noted that MW0's, with one
maintenance activities in progress including the processing of mainte-
    exception, were appropriately filled out and all MW0s reviewed addressed
nance work orders (MWO) in accordance with the requirements of 00350-C.
    such areas as QC hold points and proper initial review by other depart-
The inspectors also reviewed completed work packages that were accom-
    ments.     The inspector noted a number of cross outs which detracted from
plished under the operational QA program.
    legibility. The inspector identified the following items:
The inspectors verified that
    a.   The inspector determined that maintenance personnel had not verified
the licensee had implemented its planned maintenance program.
          that approved drawings, procedures and vendor manuals included in
Based on
          MW0s in use in the field were the current revision.               Procedures
the review, IFI 424/86-117-24 is closed.
          00103-C, Document Distribution and Control, and 00101-C, Drawing
The field review consisted of observing 14 MW0s which addressed various
          Control, required that drawings, procedures and vendor manuals be
aspects of plant maintenance.
          verified as current every seven days. These procedures also required
The inspector noted that MW0's, with one
          that any documents which affected the revision to be noted on the
exception, were appropriately filled out and all MW0s reviewed addressed
          affected working copy.           In addition, procedure 20050-C, MWPG Work
such areas as QC hold points and proper initial review by other depart-
          Order Processing, requires that working copy documents be verified
ments.
          current prior to their issuance to the field; and, procedure 20407-C,
The inspector noted a number of cross outs which detracted from
          Maintenance Conduct of Operations, states that it is the responsi-
legibility. The inspector identified the following items:
          bility of the user to ensure that only current, approved working copy
a.
          documents are used.         The maintenance personnel observed by the
The inspector determined that maintenance personnel had not verified
          inspector had failed to perform the seven day review for drawings on
that approved drawings, procedures and vendor manuals included in
          MW0s 18700429,18700453 and 18624440 and for vendor manuals on MW0
MW0s in use in the field were the current revision.
          18624165.
Procedures
00103-C, Document Distribution and Control, and 00101-C, Drawing
Control, required that drawings, procedures and vendor manuals be
verified as current every seven days. These procedures also required
that any documents which affected the revision to be noted on the
affected working copy.
In addition, procedure 20050-C, MWPG Work
Order Processing, requires that working copy documents be verified
current prior to their issuance to the field; and, procedure 20407-C,
Maintenance Conduct of Operations, states that it is the responsi-
bility of the user to ensure that only current, approved working copy
documents are used.
The maintenance personnel observed by the
inspector had failed to perform the seven day review for drawings on
MW0s 18700429,18700453 and 18624440 and for vendor manuals on MW0
18624165.
l
l
i
i
!                         --
!
                                  . - .         _ _ _       _ ,_-         - - _ .     _ .._ - _ ._
--
. - .
_ _ _
_ ,_-
- - _ .
.. - .


          .                                   ._.
.
  l'
._.
                                            18
l'
            10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities
18
            affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
            instructions, procedures or drawings.       The failure to follow
Criterion V,
            procedures 00101-C, 00103-C and 20407-C is identified as an
requires that activities
            example of violation 424/87-01-01.
affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented
            During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspector determined that
instructions, procedures or drawings.
            the drawings and vendor manuals included in the MW0s reviewed were
The failure to follow
            the latest revisions. The Maintenance Department issued a memorandum
procedures 00101-C, 00103-C and 20407-C is identified as an
            to all maintenance department supervisors and foremen requiring them
example of violation 424/87-01-01.
            to review all work packages in their possession to assure that all
During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspector determined that
            working copy documents are the latest revision.
the drawings and vendor manuals included in the MW0s reviewed were
            Deficiency Report (DR) 1-87-0185 was written by the licensee to
the latest revisions. The Maintenance Department issued a memorandum
            document the finding. The licensee stated that the Quality Assurance
to all maintenance department supervisors and foremen requiring them
            Department will perform random audits of the maintenance program.
to review all work packages in their possession to assure that all
            Additionally, the licensee will consider incorporating into the
working copy documents are the latest revision.
,          appropriate Maintenance Department procedure the requirement that
Deficiency Report (DR) 1-87-0185 was written by the licensee to
            foremen and supervisors verify weekly that working copy documents are
document the finding. The licensee stated that the Quality Assurance
Department will perform random audits of the maintenance program.
Additionally, the licensee will consider incorporating into the
appropriate Maintenance Department procedure the requirement that
,
'
'
            the latest revision.
foremen and supervisors verify weekly that working copy documents are
      b.   Paragraphs 4.1.2.c through e of 00350-C, stated that MW0s were not
the latest revision.
            required for certain activities which do not involve safety-related,
b.
            seismic or environmentally qualified equipment. The inspector
Paragraphs 4.1.2.c through e of 00350-C, stated that MW0s were not
            interviewed members of the Maintenance Work Planning Group concerning
required for certain activities which do not involve safety-related,
            the process used in making this determination and documentation of
seismic or environmentally qualified equipment.
            the review. The MWPG stated that equipment addressed by paragraphs
The inspector
            c, d, and e of 00350-C was contained in the Nuclear Plant Management
interviewed members of the Maintenance Work Planning Group concerning
            Information System (NPMIS) which delineates all of the pertinent
the process used in making this determination and documentation of
            information on the safety-related, seismic and environmental qualifi-
the review.
            cation classifications of equipment. If the foreman is in doubt, an
The MWPG stated that equipment addressed by paragraphs
            MWO is submitted which will be reviewed for procedural applicability.
c, d, and e of 00350-C was contained in the Nuclear Plant Management
            Additionally, paragraph d, which addresses labeling, was being
Information System (NPMIS) which delineates all of the pertinent
            performed under operations procedure 10016-C, Equipment Labeling
information on the safety-related, seismic and environmental qualifi-
            Guidelines.
cation classifications of equipment.
            No violations or deviations were identified.
If the foreman is in doubt, an
      c.   The inspector noted that MW0 18624097 did not have a functional
MWO is submitted which will be reviewed for procedural applicability.
            test assigned in block 32 as required by procedure 00350-C. During
Additionally, paragraph d, which addresses labeling, was being
            review of other maintenance work orders the inspectors noted that
performed under operations procedure 10016-C, Equipment Labeling
            MW0s appeared weak in the area of functional testing. This item is
Guidelines.
            of particular concern in light of the number of findings identified
No violations or deviations were identified.
            by the Quality Assurance Department related to the failure to assign
c.
            functional testing to MW0s. These findings are documented in audit
The inspector noted that MW0 18624097 did not have a functional
            reports No. OP15/TP02-86/20, #045-II, July 12 thru August 5,1986;
test assigned in block 32 as required by procedure 00350-C.
            No. OP15-86/45, November 17 thru December 5, 1986; and No. OP15-87/03,
During
            January 6 thru 11,1987.     The inspectors identified this item as IFI
review of other maintenance work orders the inspectors noted that
            424/87-01-03.
MW0s appeared weak in the area of functional testing.
This item is
of particular concern in light of the number of findings identified
by the Quality Assurance Department related to the failure to assign
functional testing to MW0s.
These findings are documented in audit
reports No. OP15/TP02-86/20, #045-II, July 12 thru August 5,1986;
No. OP15-86/45, November 17 thru December 5, 1986; and No. OP15-87/03,
January 6 thru 11,1987.
The inspectors identified this item as IFI
424/87-01-03.
i
i
1
1
    -             _     ,                       -- - ,             .-.   - . - - , . - - . .
-
_
,
--
-
,
. - .
.-.
- . -
- , .
- - . .


                                                              _ _ _ _                     _   _ __   _       _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
  .
_
                                                19
_ __
            The inspector reviewed the corrective action for this item during
_
            the week of January 12, 1987. In response to the item, the licensee
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
            had issued procedure 20051-C, Maintenance Work Order Functional
.
            Tests, to provide guidelines for proper functional test assignments.
19
            The licensee also plans to revise the MWO processing procedure to
The inspector reviewed the corrective action for this item during
            assign the functional testing requirements after the work has been
the week of January 12, 1987.
            accomplished. In addition, the licensee established a review team
In response to the item, the licensee
            assigned the task of assessing the quality of the MW0s being issued
had issued procedure 20051-C, Maintenance Work Order Functional
            by the Maintenance Work Planning Group and returning to the MWPG
Tests, to provide guidelines for proper functional test assignments.
            those MW0s lacking sufficient direction or adequate functional
The licensee also plans to revise the MWO processing procedure to
            testing. The work conducted under MWO 18624097 was complete and
assign the functional testing requirements after the work has been
            awaiting the assignment of the appropriate functional testing. The
accomplished.
            inspector determined that the licensee had implemented procedures
In addition, the licensee established a review team
            which provided adequate direction and review to ensure that MWO
assigned the task of assessing the quality of the MW0s being issued
            instructions are sufficiently detailed and are assigned the appropri-
by the Maintenance Work Planning Group and returning to the MWPG
            ate functional testing.       IFI 424/87-01-03 is closed. The IFI number
those MW0s lacking sufficient direction or adequate functional
            will remain assigned to the item to allow tracking of the finding.
testing.
            No violations or deviations were identified.
The work conducted under MWO 18624097 was complete and
    9. Review of Aaministrative Controls for Temporary Modifications (424518)
awaiting the assignment of the appropriate functional testing.
      During the inspection, the inspector noted that there were numerous
The
      temporary modifications installed in the plant. The inspectors determined
inspector determined that the licensee had implemented procedures
      that the licensee had a mechanism to review temporary modifications and
which provided adequate direction and review to ensure that MWO
      their effect on system operability once the system was formally turned
instructions are sufficiently detailed and are assigned the appropri-
      over to operations. However, the licensee was performing surveillances on
ate functional testing.
      systems that had temporary modifications installed.                                 Therefore, the
IFI 424/87-01-03 is closed. The IFI number
      validity of the surveillance could be affected for surveillance tests
will remain assigned to the item to allow tracking of the finding.
      completed after preoperational testing and prior to establishing configu-
No violations or deviations were identified.
      ration control by Operations.         This concern was identified as Inspector
9.
      Followup Item 424/87-01-05.
Review of Aaministrative Controls for Temporary Modifications (424518)
      During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspection team conducted a
During the inspection, the inspector noted that there were numerous
      review of the licensee's procedures.           Procedure 00350-C, Maintenance
temporary modifications installed in the plant. The inspectors determined
      Program, addressed the removal of temporary modifications to ensure
that the licensee had a mechanism to review temporary modifications and
      that proper documentation was provided and that the functional testing,
their effect on system operability once the system was formally turned
      including assessment of its impact on surveillances, was performed.
over to operations. However, the licensee was performing surveillances on
      Procedure 00307-C, Temporary Modifications, addressed the methods utilized
systems that had temporary modifications installed.
      to ensure that temporary modifications are properly identified, docu-
Therefore, the
validity of the surveillance could be affected for surveillance tests
completed after preoperational testing and prior to establishing configu-
ration control by Operations.
This concern was identified as Inspector
Followup Item 424/87-01-05.
During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspection team conducted a
review of the licensee's procedures.
Procedure 00350-C, Maintenance
Program, addressed the removal of temporary modifications to ensure
that proper documentation was provided and that the functional testing,
including assessment of its impact on surveillances, was performed.
Procedure 00307-C, Temporary Modifications, addressed the methods utilized
to ensure that temporary modifications are properly identified, docu-
mented, controlled and evaluated.
,
,
      mented, controlled and evaluated.
While under the jurisdiction of the Start Up Manual, Procedures SUM-10,
      While under the jurisdiction of the Start Up Manual, Procedures SUM-10,
Temporary Modification Control, and SUM-22, Maintenance Work Orders,
      Temporary Modification Control, and SUM-22, Maintenance Work Orders,
adequately addressed the subject of temporary modifications including the
,
,
      adequately addressed the subject of temporary modifications including the
assessment of its impact on surveillance tests.
'
'
      assessment of its impact on surveillance tests.
.-
        .-                            _ --               .           _ _ - - . . . - - -                 . . .                         -
_ --
.
_ _ - - . . . - - -
. . .
-


                                                                    __ _ _.   __ .
__
                                          20
_ _.
    The aforementioned maintenance and temporary modification procedures
__
    ensure that work / temporary modifications performed on a system will verify
.
    that surveillances are active and document that components / systems are
20
    functioning properly and capable of performing their intended safety
The aforementioned maintenance and temporary modification procedures
    function. Temporary modifications which were in place during pre-
ensure that work / temporary modifications performed on a system will verify
    operational testing which was utilized to satisfy surveillance require-
that surveillances are active and document that components / systems are
    ments were adequately addressed by the constraints imposed by Section 4.4
functioning properly and capable of performing their intended safety
    of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.           Under the pre-
function.
    operational test program, the test supervisor was responsible for
Temporary modifications which were in place during pre-
    reviewing the temporary modification log for items which may preclude
operational testing which was utilized to satisfy surveillance require-
    completion of the test or invalidate the test results upon completion.
ments were adequately addressed by the constraints imposed by Section 4.4
    Specifically, paragraph 4.4.6.1 required that " documentation for the
of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.
    completed procedure or work activity shall be carefully reviewed to ensure
Under the pre-
    that satisfaction of the surveillance requirements is clearly documented
operational test program, the test supervisor was responsible for
    and that the conditions during the period of the test are the same as
reviewing the temporary modification log for items which may preclude
    would be experienced during the operational phase surveillance test
completion of the test or invalidate the test results upon completion.
    procedure. Discrepancies shall be noted in the comments section of the
Specifically, paragraph 4.4.6.1 required that " documentation for the
    documentation check list."
completed procedure or work activity shall be carefully reviewed to ensure
    As a further area of discussion, it should be noted that test / surveil-
that satisfaction of the surveillance requirements is clearly documented
    lance procedures contain steps which require the introduction of
and that the conditions during the period of the test are the same as
    modifications which place the system / component into a configuration such
would be experienced during the operational phase surveillance test
    that the test / surveillance procedure attains the required objective. The
procedure.
    introduction of such modifications is reviewed with the development of the
Discrepancies shall be noted in the comments section of the
    procedure. The inspector feels that all concerns regarding temporary
documentation check list."
    modifications have been addressed and therefore inspector followup item
As a further area of discussion, it should be noted that test / surveil-
    424/87-01-05 is closed. The inspector followup item number will remain
lance procedures contain steps which require the introduction of
    assigned to the item to allow tracking of the item.
modifications which place the system / component into a configuration such
    No violations or deviations were identified.
that the test / surveillance procedure attains the required objective. The
introduction of such modifications is reviewed with the development of the
procedure.
The inspector feels that all concerns regarding temporary
modifications have been addressed and therefore inspector followup item
424/87-01-05 is closed.
The inspector followup item number will remain
assigned to the item to allow tracking of the item.
No violations or deviations were identified.
10. Control Room Activities Review (424508)
10. Control Room Activities Review (424508)
    a.   The inspector reviewed control room administrative procedures and
a.
          verified documentation maintained in the control room to assure
The inspector reviewed control room administrative procedures and
          the documentation was being maintained in accordance with procedures.
verified documentation maintained in the control room to assure
          Documents reviewed were:
the documentation was being maintained in accordance with procedures.
          Reactor Operator & Shift Supervisor Logs
Documents reviewed were:
          LC0 Log                                                                   i
Reactor Operator & Shift Supervisor Logs
                                                                                    !
LC0 Log
          Standing Orders
i
          Jumper & Lifted Wire Clearance Log
Standing Orders
          Operations Reading Book
Jumper & Lifted Wire Clearance Log
          Disabled Aanunciator Log
Operations Reading Book
          The inspector also checked 12 hour Technical Specification valve
Disabled Aanunciator Log
          position verification requirements applicable to the ECCS subsystems.     ,
The inspector also checked 12 hour Technical Specification valve
          These verifications were being performed properly. The inspector had     l
position verification requirements applicable to the ECCS subsystems.
          no comments.
,
                                                                                    l
These verifications were being performed properly. The inspector had
                                                                                    1
no comments.
                                                                                    !


                                                                                  - - _ _
- - _ _
                                                                                          l
,
                                                                                          ,
21
                                    21
It was noted previously that numerous administrative controls
      It was noted previously that numerous administrative controls
established for the management of those plant and control room
      established for the management of those plant and control room
activities conducted under the direction of licensed operatcrs
      activities conducted under the direction of licensed operatcrs
were not implemented.
      were not implemented.     These findings were documented in NRC
These findings were documented in NRC
      Inspection Report 424/86-117.     However, during this inspection
Inspection Report 424/86-117.
      the inspectors noted a marked improvement in this area. The
However, during this inspection
      administrative controls were implemented and review of record,
the inspectors noted a marked improvement in this area.
      logs and checklists indicated thorough input and current status.
The
      The inspector had no further comments in this area.
administrative controls were implemented and review of record,
      No violations or deviations were identified.
logs and checklists indicated thorough input and current status.
    b. (Closed)   Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10 (TMI Action Item
The inspector had no further comments in this area.
      I.C.2). Shift Relief and Turnover. The inspector reviewed procedure
No violations or deviations were identified.
      10004-C, Shift Relief, Rev. 3, and the shift turnover process to
b.
      ensure adequate controls were in place to provide for a complete
(Closed)
      shift turncver and the meeting of TMI action item I.C.2 requirements.
Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10 (TMI Action Item
      The inspector's review included observation of control room activity,
I.C.2).
      review of logkeeping and log review, and a review of all procedures
Shift Relief and Turnover. The inspector reviewed procedure
      governing shift turnover.
10004-C, Shift Relief, Rev. 3, and the shift turnover process to
      The inspector noted that adequate controls appeared to be in place
ensure adequate controls were in place to provide for a complete
      to maintain access to the control room in an orderly manner. The
shift turncver and the meeting of TMI action item I.C.2 requirements.
      operators also appeared to display a professional manner and surveil-
The inspector's review included observation of control room activity,
      lance of the control boards appeared to be adequate.
review of logkeeping and log review, and a review of all procedures
      The Reactor Operator (RO), Balance Of Plant (80P), and Non-Licensed
governing shift turnover.
      Operators (NLO) utilize rounds sheets to log and record plant
The inspector noted that adequate controls appeared to be in place
      parameters. The inspector reviewed the rounds sheets of the R0, B0P,
to maintain access to the control room in an orderly manner.
      and the NL0s. These sheets appeared to be properly completed and to
The
      adequately meet the part of TMI action item I.C.2 which requires that
operators also appeared to display a professional manner and surveil-
      the licensee provide assurance that plant parameters were within
lance of the control boards appeared to be adequate.
      allowable limits. The rounds sheets of the NL0s are reviewed by the
The Reactor Operator (RO), Balance Of Plant (80P), and Non-Licensed
      R0, B0P, and Shift Supervisor (SS) to ensure knowledge of plant
Operators (NLO) utilize rounds sheets to log and record plant
      parameters not indicated in the control room. The rounds sheets of
parameters. The inspector reviewed the rounds sheets of the R0, B0P,
      the R0 and the B0P are also reviewed by the SS. The inspector
and the NL0s.
      determined that these reviews appeared to be taking place and that
These sheets appeared to be properly completed and to
      the operators in the control room were cognizant of the status of the
adequately meet the part of TMI action item I.C.2 which requires that
      plant.
the licensee provide assurance that plant parameters were within
      While reviewing the narrative logs, the inspector noted on
allowable limits.
      January 15, 1987, that the SS log had no initialed review by
The rounds sheets of the NL0s are reviewed by the
      the day shift SS for the previous night's log entries.       When
R0, B0P, and Shift Supervisor (SS) to ensure knowledge of plant
      questioned as to the apparent lack of a review, the SS told the
parameters not indicated in the control room.
      inspector that he did not review the previous night's logs and that
The rounds sheets of
      he was not required to review his own logs by procedure because
the R0 and the B0P are also reviewed by the SS.
      the verbal turnover from the off-going SS was adequate. The
The inspector
      inspector showed the SS where procedure 10004-C, Revision 3, Shift
determined that these reviews appeared to be taking place and that
      Relief, required the on-coming operator to review and initial the
the operators in the control room were cognizant of the status of the
._.                                             -.                           - - . ,
plant.
While reviewing the narrative logs, the inspector noted on
January 15, 1987, that the SS log had no initialed review by
the day shift SS for the previous night's log entries.
When
questioned as to the apparent lack of a review, the SS told the
inspector that he did not review the previous night's logs and that
he was not required to review his own logs by procedure because
the verbal turnover from the off-going SS was adequate.
The
inspector showed the SS where procedure 10004-C, Revision 3, Shift
Relief, required the on-coming operator to review and initial the
._.
-.
- - . ,


                                        22
22
          narrative logs completed since the last shift worked by that operator
narrative logs completed since the last shift worked by that operator
          or for the preceding 5 days, whichever is less. The SS stated that
or for the preceding 5 days, whichever is less.
          he was referring to direction received from procedure 10001-C,
The SS stated that
          Revision 3, Logkeeping, however, when he showed the procedure to
he was referring to direction received from procedure 10001-C,
          the inspector he noted that he was incorrect and that he was also
Revision 3, Logkeeping, however, when he showed the procedure to
          required to review his narrative logs by this procedure.
the inspector he noted that he was incorrect and that he was also
        The failure to review and initial the Shif t Supervisor narrative
required to review his narrative logs by this procedure.
          logs is a failure to follow approved plant procedures in accordance
The failure to review and initial the Shif t Supervisor narrative
        with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V. This item is identified as
logs is a failure to follow approved plant procedures in accordance
          an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
          During the review of procedure 10004-C the inspector identified a
This item is identified as
          discrepancy between the procedure and the On Shift Operations
an example of violation 424/87-01-01.
          Supervisor (0505), R0, and B0P checklists. These checklists are
During the review of procedure 10004-C the inspector identified a
          provided in procedures 11870-C,11872-C, and 11869-C, respectively.
discrepancy between the procedure and the On Shift Operations
          The procedures require each on-coming OSOS, R0, and 80P to review the
Supervisor (0505), R0, and B0P checklists.
          following logs in addition to the rounds sheets and narrative logs:
These checklists are
          Special Conditions Surveillance Log, Clearance Log, Lif ted Wire Log,
provided in procedures 11870-C,11872-C, and 11869-C, respectively.
          and Temporary Modifications Log. The OSOS, R0, and 80P checklists
The procedures require each on-coming OSOS, R0, and 80P to review the
        were missing the appropriate check blocks for each of the above logs.
following logs in addition to the rounds sheets and narrative logs:
          This was brought to the attention of the licensee and the checkshetts
Special Conditions Surveillance Log, Clearance Log, Lif ted Wire Log,
        were modified to reflect the intent of the procedure.
and Temporary Modifications Log.
          The TMI action item also required implementation of a system to
The OSOS, R0, and 80P checklists
          evaluate the effectiveness of the shift relief turnover procedure.
were missing the appropriate check blocks for each of the above logs.
          Step 3.12 of procedure 10004-C states that the 050S shall make an
This was brought to the attention of the licensee and the checkshetts
          evaluation of shift relief and turnover at least semiannually.       The
were modified to reflect the intent of the procedure.
          results of this evaluation were to be forwarded to the Operations
The TMI action item also required implementation of a system to
        Manager for disposition. Although the statement contained in the
evaluate the effectiveness of the shift relief turnover procedure.
          licensee's procedure directed the Operations Superintendent to
Step 3.12 of procedure 10004-C states that the 050S shall make an
          perform an evaluation, the procedure provided no instructions on how
evaluation of shift relief and turnover at least semiannually.
          the evaluation was to be performed. The inspector discussed this
The
          item with the licensee and the licensee issued a revision to the
results of this evaluation were to be forwarded to the Operations
          Non-Technical Specification Activities sheet.     Prior to the revision
Manager for disposition.
          the sheet merely restated the step in the procedure and provided no
Although the statement contained in the
          further direction.     The revision provides direction to the OSOS by
licensee's procedure directed the Operations Superintendent to
          listing several specific items to be addressed during the evaluation.
perform an evaluation, the procedure provided no instructions on how
          This revision appeared to satisfy the final requirement of the TMI
the evaluation was to be performed.
          action item. TMI Action Item I.C.2 and IFI 424/86-60-10 are closed.
The inspector discussed this
11. Inspection and Enforcement Notice Review (92701)
item with the licensee and the licensee issued a revision to the
    The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to IE Notice 86-61,
Non-Technical Specification Activities sheet.
    Failure of Auxiliary Feedwater Manual Isolation Valve.         The inspector   l
Prior to the revision
    discussed the notice with the licensee and determined that the preventive
the sheet merely restated the step in the procedure and provided no
    maintenance requirements for manual isolation valves were determined on a
further direction.
    case-by-case basis during the formulation of the PM program. Based or
The revision provides direction to the OSOS by
    this review this item is closed.
listing several specific items to be addressed during the evaluation.
This revision appeared to satisfy the final requirement of the TMI
action item. TMI Action Item I.C.2 and IFI 424/86-60-10 are closed.
11.
Inspection and Enforcement Notice Review (92701)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to IE Notice 86-61,
Failure of Auxiliary Feedwater Manual Isolation Valve.
The inspector
l
discussed the notice with the licensee and determined that the preventive
maintenance requirements for manual isolation valves were determined on a
case-by-case basis during the formulation of the PM program.
Based or
this review this item is closed.


                                                                          _ . - _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
_ . - _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
                                        23
23
12. Inspector Followup Items (92701)
12.
    a.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-02.     Evaluation of
Inspector Followup Items (92701)
        Operational Event Reports. The IFI involved a concern that the
a.
        licensee tended to address items programmatically rather than
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-02.
        technically. The applicant had committed to reopen and reevaluate IE
Evaluation of
        Information Notice 85-23 and reevaluate preoperational testing
Operational Event Reports.
        associated with differential pressure transmitters. The inspector
The IFI involved a concern that the
        reviewed a March 14, 1986 memorandum from Ron Bone, GPC to Bob Lide,
licensee tended to address items programmatically rather than
        GPC which provided the technical evaluation of the preoperational and
technically. The applicant had committed to reopen and reevaluate IE
        startup testing of the differential pressure transmitters and an
Information Notice 85-23 and reevaluate preoperational testing
        evaluation of IE Information Notice 85-23. The inspector did not
associated with differential pressure transmitters.
        identify any concerns with the licensee's disposition of the evalua-
The inspector
        tion findings.   In addition, the inspector reviewed five additional
reviewed a March 14, 1986 memorandum from Ron Bone, GPC to Bob Lide,
        IE Information Notice evaluations and identified no concerns. This
GPC which provided the technical evaluation of the preoperational and
        item is considered closed.
startup testing of the differential pressure transmitters and an
    b.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-03. Performance of Safety
evaluation of IE Information Notice 85-23.
        Evaluations and Duties and Responsibilities of Plant Review Board.
The inspector did not
        The IFI concerned the lack of procedural requirements to submit
identify any concerns with the licensee's disposition of the evalua-
        safety evaluations for unreviewed safety questions and Technical
tion findings.
        Specification changec to the Plant Review Board for review. The
In addition, the inspector reviewed five additional
        inspector reviewed a revised copy of 00051-C, Review and Approval of
IE Information Notice evaluations and identified no concerns.
        Procedures, which added this requirement. This item is closed.
This
    c.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-01.       Independent
item is considered closed.
        Verification. The inspector reviewed procedure 00308-C and deter-
b.
        mined that the licensee had met the NRC g'aidance in regard to
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-03.
        independent verification. The inspector verified that independent
Performance of Safety
        verification was being performed in accordance with procedure
Evaluations and Duties and Responsibilities of Plant Review Board.
        00308-6, Independent Verification Policy. The inspector observed the
The IFI concerned the lack of procedural requirements to submit
        performance of a Boric Acid Transfer Pump tag-out and checked a
safety evaluations for unreviewed safety questions and Technical
        co.'pleted RHR system lineup. This item is considered closed.
Specification changec to the Plant Review Board for review.
    d.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-02. Lack of Vents on
The
        AFW Piping at Apparent System High Points. The inspectors had noted
inspector reviewed a revised copy of 00051-C, Review and Approval of
        in a system walkdown of the Auxiliary Feedwater System that there
Procedures, which added this requirement. This item is closed.
        were no high point vents on the AFW side of the first check valve
c.
        between the AFW system and the main feedwater bypass line for stecm
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-01.
        generators 1 and 4. The inspectors were concerned that any back-
Independent
        leakage and subsequent steam formation of main feedwater through
Verification.
        those check valves would become trapped in the highpoints and could
The inspector reviewed procedure 00308-C and deter-
        result in water hammer upon AFW initiation. There were no provisions
mined that the licensee had met the NRC g'aidance in regard to
        within the procedure, 13610-1, to monitor these highpoints for                                       l
independent verification.
        1eakage and steam formation, nor to take action, upon detection of                                   ,
The inspector verified that independent
        steam formation, to resolve water hanner concerns. The inspector                                     !
verification was being performed in accordance with procedure
        reviewed the analysis performed by the licensee for backleakage into                                 )
00308-6, Independent Verification Policy. The inspector observed the
        the AFW system and determined that the present design and monitoring
performance of a Boric Acid Transfer Pump tag-out and checked a
        procedures provide adequate assurance that backleakage will not occur                               l
co.'pleted RHR system lineup. This item is considered closed.
        or result in waterhammer in the AFW system. This item is closed.                                     -
d.
                                                                                                              l
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-02.
                                                                                                              l
Lack of Vents on
                                                                                                              1
AFW Piping at Apparent System High Points. The inspectors had noted
                                                                                                            -
in a system walkdown of the Auxiliary Feedwater System that there
were no high point vents on the AFW side of the first check valve
between the AFW system and the main feedwater bypass line for stecm
generators 1 and 4.
The inspectors were concerned that any back-
leakage and subsequent steam formation of main feedwater through
those check valves would become trapped in the highpoints and could
result in water hammer upon AFW initiation. There were no provisions
within the procedure, 13610-1, to monitor these highpoints for
1eakage and steam formation, nor to take action, upon detection of
,
steam formation, to resolve water hanner concerns.
The inspector
reviewed the analysis performed by the licensee for backleakage into
the AFW system and determined that the present design and monitoring
procedures provide adequate assurance that backleakage will not occur
or result in waterhammer in the AFW system. This item is closed.
-
1
.
-


                                                                                                                  . - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
_.
                _.  _
_
                                                    24
. - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
            e. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-03. Precautions on
24
                Maintaining Subcooling Margin.                   Item a was closed in Inspection
e.
                Report 424/86-117. In regard to Item b, which concerned A0P 18009-1,
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-03.
                Steam Generator Tube Leak, the inspector had determined that Step 5,
Precautions on
                " Response Not Obtained", required the reduction of RCS temperature
Maintaining Subcooling Margin.
                from 557 F to 500 F prior to isolation of the faulted SG if the
Item a was closed in Inspection
                faulted S/G was not immediately identified. The procedure then
Report 424/86-117.
                required the subsequent identification and isolation of the faulted
In regard to Item b, which concerned A0P 18009-1,
                S/G and RCS depressurization to 25-50 psig greater than the faulted
Steam Generator Tube Leak, the inspector had determined that Step 5,
                S/G pressure. Under these conditions, RCS subcooling margin would be
" Response Not Obtained", required the reduction of RCS temperature
                approximately 5 F, which is substantially less than the 28 F sub-
from 557 F to 500 F prior to isolation of the faulted SG if the
                cooling margin parameter delineated in procedure 19200-1, F-0,
faulted S/G was not immediately identified.
                Critical Safety Function Status Trees, for assuring adequate core
The procedure then
                cooling in the Emergency Operating Procedure Network.                             In addition,
required the subsequent identification and isolation of the faulted
                no instructions were given to isolate the cold leg accumulators at
S/G and RCS depressurization to 25-50 psig greater than the faulted
                950 psig.
S/G pressure. Under these conditions, RCS subcooling margin would be
                The inspector reviewed the revision of the procedure that had been
approximately 5 F, which is substantially less than the 28 F sub-
                reviewed and approved by the Plant Review Board.                             (The revision was
cooling margin parameter delineated in procedure 19200-1, F-0,
                handwritten at the time of the review.)                   Prior to the steps that
Critical Safety Function Status Trees, for assuring adequate core
                depressurized the RCS to 25-50 psig of the faulted S/G, the licensee
cooling in the Emergency Operating Procedure Network.
In addition,
no instructions were given to isolate the cold leg accumulators at
950 psig.
The inspector reviewed the revision of the procedure that had been
reviewed and approved by the Plant Review Board.
(The revision was
handwritten at the time of the review.)
Prior to the steps that
depressurized the RCS to 25-50 psig of the faulted S/G, the licensee
i
i
                had inserted the following steps: "If pressurizer pressure lowers to
had inserted the following steps: "If pressurizer pressure lowers to
                less than 1000 psi, accumulators should be isolated." and, "During
less than 1000 psi, accumulators should be isolated." and, "During
                cooldown, maintain at least 50 F RCS subcooling." These changes
cooldown, maintain at least 50 F RCS subcooling."
                adequately addressed the problems described above and Item b of IFI
These changes
                424/86-117-03 is closed.
adequately addressed the problems described above and Item b of IFI
            f. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-04. Correction of Valve
424/86-117-03 is closed.
                Identification and Lineup Discrepancies. Each item identified in IFI
f.
                424/86-117-04 is addressed separately below.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-04. Correction of Valve
                Item a.   NSCW valve 1-1202-X4-205, shown to be on the return line
Identification and Lineup Discrepancies. Each item identified in IFI
l               of the train "A" reactor cavity cooling coil, was listed on the
424/86-117-04 is addressed separately below.
                alignment checklist of procedure 11150-1, Rev.1, but was not on
Item a.
                the P&ID, nor was it found in the system during a system walkdown.
NSCW valve 1-1202-X4-205, shown to be on the return line
                The licensee provided the inspector a Temporary Change to Procedure
l
                (TCP) form number 11150-1-87-2, generated and approved on January 8,
of the train "A"
                1987, which corrected the checklist. The TCP required final approval
reactor cavity cooling coil, was listed on the
                by the Plant Review Board by January 22, 1987.                               Item a of IFI
alignment checklist of procedure 11150-1, Rev.1, but was not on
                424/86-117-04 is closed.
the P&ID, nor was it found in the system during a system walkdown.
                Item b.   A vent valve on the NSCW system on the outlet from the
The licensee provided the inspector a Temporary Change to Procedure
                lube oil cooler for the centrifugal charging pumps on train A was
(TCP) form number 11150-1-87-2, generated and approved on January 8,
                not on the valve lineup verification list of procedure 11150-1,
1987, which corrected the checklist. The TCP required final approval
                Rev. O. This discrepancy had been corrected on Rev.1 of this
by the Plant Review Board by January 22, 1987.
                procedure.   Item b of IFI 424/86-117-04 is closed.                                                                 l
Item a of IFI
                                                                                                                                      l
424/86-117-04 is closed.
                ltem c.   This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.                                                       .
Item b.
                                                                                                                                      1
A vent valve on the NSCW system on the outlet from the
!               Item d.   This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.                                                       I
lube oil cooler for the centrifugal charging pumps on train A was
                                                                                                                                      !
not on the valve lineup verification list of procedure 11150-1,
  .-- - -, -       .           _
Rev. O.
                                      -     , . _ .   . - . . _           - - _ . , - -- -               - - - _ - - ,
This discrepancy had been corrected on Rev.1 of this
procedure.
Item b of IFI 424/86-117-04 is closed.
ltem c.
This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
.
1
!
Item d.
This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
.-- - -, -
.
_
-
, . _ .
. - . . _
- - _ . , - -- -
- - - _ - - ,


                                  25
25
  Item e. The CS system alignment procedure, 11115-1, and the CS
Item e.
  system P&ID, drawing 1X4DB131, did not agree. The CS drawing
The CS system alignment procedure, 11115-1, and the CS
  contained two valves, X-40 and X-127, on a flushing line downstream
system P&ID, drawing 1X4DB131, did not agree.
  of the B train CS pump that were not included in the alignment
The CS drawing
  procedure.     The valves were verified to exist during the CS system
contained two valves, X-40 and X-127, on a flushing line downstream
  walkdown.     The drawing indicated that the valves were both normally
of the B train CS pump that were not included in the alignment
  closed.     Also, in the same flushing connection, the CS alignment
procedure.
  procedure showed valve U4-012 closed. The CS P&ID showed the valve
The valves were verified to exist during the CS system
  locked open. The inspector reviewed procedure 11115-1 and determined
walkdown.
  that the licensee had corrected the discrepancies.     Item e of IFI
The drawing indicated that the valves were both normally
  424/86-117-04 is closed.
closed.
  Iten f.   The IFI concerned the removal of a reference to a obsolete
Also, in the same flushing connection, the CS alignment
  controller from a procedure. No followup review was considered
procedure showed valve U4-012 closed.
  necessary.
The CS P&ID showed the valve
  Item g. The inspector noted that CTB Cooling Unit Outlet Dampers
locked open. The inspector reviewed procedure 11115-1 and determined
  were required to be locked open per Containment Heat Removal System
that the licensee had corrected the discrepancies.
  drawing 1X4DB212.     Procedure 13120-1 did not include the locking
Item e of IFI
  requirement and the locking method. The inspector determined that
424/86-117-04 is closed.
  the licensee had corrected the discrepancy. Item g of 424/86-117-04
Iten f.
  is closed.
The IFI concerned the removal of a reference to a obsolete
g. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-05. Discrepancies in
controller from a procedure.
  Unit Operating Procedures. Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-05
No followup review was considered
  is addressed separately below.
necessary.
  Item a.   Item a was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
Item g.
  Item b.   Item b was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
The inspector noted that CTB Cooling Unit Outlet Dampers
  Item c. Procedure 12006-1, step 2.2.5, paraphrased a Technical
were required to be locked open per Containment Heat Removal System
  Specification requirement. The paraphrase was incorrect. The step
drawing 1X4DB212.
  should have read "... and at least one loop in operation with the
Procedure 13120-1 did not include the locking
  reactor trip breakers open." The inspectors verified that 12006-1
requirement and the locking method.
  had been corrected. Item c of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
The inspector determined that
  Item d.   Procedure 12006-1, Section C4.1, Preparation for Continuing
the licensee had corrected the discrepancy.
  Unit Cooldown, required action be taken to accivate protection
Item g of 424/86-117-04
  against cold overpressurization. Only one method of cold over-
is closed.
  pressure protection was addressed, the use of PORVs. The procedure
g.
  also should have addressed the two other mear of cold overpressure
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-05.
  protection and a mechanism to declare which method was providing
Discrepancies in
  protection. The procedure should have addressed the implementation
Unit Operating Procedures.
  of the TS :urveillance requirement on the RHR relief valves which
Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-05
  must be completed prior to taking credit for the RHR reliefs.     The
is addressed separately below.
  inspector verified that procedure 12006-1 had been changed.     Item d
Item a.
  of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
Item a was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
                                                                          l
Item b.
                                                                          .
Item b was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
                                                  -
Item c.
                                                      g -
Procedure 12006-1, step 2.2.5, paraphrased a Technical
Specification requirement.
The paraphrase was incorrect.
The step
should have read "... and at least one loop in operation with the
reactor trip breakers open."
The inspectors verified that 12006-1
had been corrected.
Item c of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
Item d.
Procedure 12006-1, Section C4.1, Preparation for Continuing
Unit Cooldown, required action be taken to accivate protection
against cold overpressurization.
Only one method of cold over-
pressure protection was addressed, the use of PORVs.
The procedure
also should have addressed the two other mear of cold overpressure
protection and a mechanism to declare which method was providing
protection.
The procedure should have addressed the implementation
of the TS :urveillance requirement on the RHR relief valves which
must be completed prior to taking credit for the RHR reliefs.
The
inspector verified that procedure 12006-1 had been changed.
Item d
of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
.
-
g
-


                        . -.                         .                                                                                         .
.
-.
.
.
;
;
                                                                                          26
26
                                    Item e.             Procedure 12005-1 did not include a requirement in the
Item e.
Procedure 12005-1 did not include a requirement in the
Limitations section to refer to TS 3.4.1.2.
The inspector verified
i
i
                                    Limitations section to refer to TS 3.4.1.2.                            The inspector verified
that procedure 12005-1 had been changed.
                                    that procedure 12005-1 had been changed.                         Item e of IFI 424/86-117-05
Item e of IFI 424/86-117-05
is closed.
;
Item f.
Procedure 12006-1 did not include a precaution to assure
that when the reactor is in the source range, positive reactivity
additions will only be made by one controlled method at a time.
The inspector verified that 12006-1 had been changed.
Item f of
IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
j
h.
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-07.
Discrepancies in
Equipment Labeling.
Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-07 is
;
;
                                    is closed.
addressed separately below.
                                    Item f. Procedure 12006-1 did not include a precaution to assure
i
                                    that when the reactor is in the source range, positive reactivity
Item a.
                                    additions will only be made by one controlled method at a time.
Name tags were missing from RHR valves HV-8701B and
                                    The inspector verified that 12006-1 had been changed. Item f of
1205-027.
                                    IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.
The licensee stated that one of these tags had been
j                                h. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-07.                                    Discrepancies in
replaced and the other had been ordered.
                                    Equipment Labeling. Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-07 is
These valves will be
;
examined during a subsequent inspection to assure that these actions
                                    addressed separately below.
l
i                                   Item a.             Name tags were missing from RHR valves HV-8701B and
are taken.
                                    1205-027.           The licensee stated that one of these tags had been
Item a of IFI 424/86-117-07 is open.
                                    replaced and the other had been ordered. These valves will be
l
                                    examined during a subsequent inspection to assure that these actions
Item b.
l                                   are taken. Item a of IFI 424/86-117-07 is open.
The inspector determined that the B train controller at
l                                   Item b. The inspector determined that the B train controller at
the remote shutdown panel was still labeled as 4.
                                    the remote shutdown panel was still labeled as 4. Item b of IFI
Item b of IFI
                                    424/86-117-07 remains open.
424/86-117-07 remains open.
                                    Item c. The TDAFW panel SG level gauge was not labeled wide range or
Item c.
                                    narrow range. The procedure did not indicate the range. An AFW to
The TDAFW panel SG level gauge was not labeled wide range or
                                    SG bypass flow gauge was not labeled with engineering units. The
narrow range.
                                    inspector verified that the SG level gauge had been labeled. The
The procedure did not indicate the range. An AFW to
                                    bypass flow gauge had not been labeled. Item c of IFI 424/86-117-07
SG bypass flow gauge was not labeled with engineering units.
                                    remains open.
The
                                    Item d.           Item d was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
inspector verified that the SG level gauge had been labeled.
                                    Item e.           Item e was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
The
                                    Item f.             The inspector had noted that engineering units were not
bypass flow gauge had not been labeled.
                                    displayed on strip chart recorder scales for main steam temperature
Item c of IFI 424/86-117-07
                                    and other recorders. The inspector subsequently reviewed labeling
remains open.
                                    of main control board strip chart recorders for engineering units.
Item d.
Item d was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
Item e.
Item e was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
Item f.
The inspector had noted that engineering units were not
displayed on strip chart recorder scales for main steam temperature
and other recorders.
The inspector subsequently reviewed labeling
of main control board strip chart recorders for engineering units.
Although the main steam temperature had been correctly labeled by
'
'
                                    Although the main steam temperature had been correctly labeled by
the licensee, other recorders still had no units.
                                    the licensee, other recorders still had no units.                                     Item f of IFI
Item f of IFI
1                                   424/86-117-07 remains open.
1
                                    Item g. The inspector noted that remote handwheels in the CVCS
424/86-117-07 remains open.
                                    system including BIT valves and charging crossover were not labeled.
Item g.
                                    The applicant stated that handwheels had been installed recently and
The inspector noted that remote handwheels in the CVCS
                                    labeling was planned but had not been completed. The inspector
system including BIT valves and charging crossover were not labeled.
The applicant stated that handwheels had been installed recently and
labeling was planned but had not been completed.
The inspector
conducted a tour of the auxiliary building levels containing the CVCS
,
,
                                    conducted a tour of the auxiliary building levels containing the CVCS
system and noted a greatly improved level of labeling for the remote
.
.
                                    system and noted a greatly improved level of labeling for the remote
manual valve operators, however, the inspector noted several remote
i
i
                                    manual valve operators, however, the inspector noted several remote
<
  <
<-,--,.-----.,,,--m-
    <-,--,.-----.,,,--m-     ,-   ----.-w.,, ,-p.m,       w     w -.----w.,-n..-,.m--   . - , ,-   -,,-,..,,--,n         ,,-y . ,,--,.--m-e-,- yme --
,-
----.-w.,,
,-p.m,
w
w
-.----w.,-n..-,.m--
. - , ,-
-,,-,..,,--,n
,,-y
,,--,.--m-e-,-
yme
--
.


                                  27
27
    manual valve operators in the waste gas disposal area which lacked
manual valve operators in the waste gas disposal area which lacked
    tags. The licensee stated that final efforts were being completed in
tags. The licensee stated that final efforts were being completed in
    assuring the adequacy of valve labeling. No additional followup is
assuring the adequacy of valve labeling.
    considered necessary. Item g of IFI 424/86-117-07 is closed.
No additional followup is
    Item h.   The CS alignment procedure, 11115-1, lists two sets of
considered necessary.
    120V AC CS MOV space heater breakers. A check of the 120V AC breaker
Item g of IFI 424/86-117-07 is closed.
Item h.
The CS alignment procedure, 11115-1, lists two sets of
120V AC CS MOV space heater breakers. A check of the 120V AC breaker
panels (IAYD1 and 18YD1) identified the breakers as being labeled
<
<
    panels (IAYD1 and 18YD1) identified the breakers as being labeled
" spares."
    " spares."   The applicant is determining if these breakers are
The applicant is determining if these breakers are
    utilized for the M0V space breakers.     Item h of IFI 424/86-117-07
utilized for the M0V space breakers.
    remains open.
Item h of IFI 424/86-117-07
  i. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-09. Review of Reactor
remains open.
    Vessel Level Indication System. Four concerns were identified during
i.
    the review of RVLIS involving procedure nomenclature, instrumentation
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-09.
    references in procedure 14228-1, a vendor recommendation for a
Review of Reactor
    control room annunciator that had not been provided, and a vendor
Vessel Level Indication System.
    recommendation for periodic checks of locally indicating null meters.
Four concerns were identified during
    The inspector was provided a Daily Schedule Control Sheet which
the review of RVLIS involving procedure nomenclature, instrumentation
    indicated that the null meters would be checked by Operations
references in procedure 14228-1, a vendor recommendation for a
    quarterly. It is noted that the RVLIS will be tested when the
control room annunciator that had not been provided, and a vendor
    reactor coolant system is at system operating pressure during startup
recommendation for periodic checks of locally indicating null meters.
    testing. The inspector will review the reuining items and the
The inspector was provided a Daily Schedule Control Sheet which
    results of the RVLIS testing after startup.       IFI 424/86-117-09
indicated that the null meters would be checked by Operations
    remains open.
quarterly.
  j. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-10. Procedure Revision
It is noted that the RVLIS will be tested when the
    to Include Check of Equipment Actuation on Control Room Ventilation
reactor coolant system is at system operating pressure during startup
    Start. The inspector reviewed procedure 13301-1, which had been
testing.
    revised in Rev.1 to include steps that verify that the outside air
The inspector will review the reuining items and the
    supply dampers close on manual actuation of Control Room Toxic Gas
results of the RVLIS testing after startup.
    Isolation. IFI 424/86-117-10 is closed.
IFI 424/86-117-09
  k. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-11.         Adequacy of
remains open.
    Procedure Prerequisites. The inspectors had identified that scme
j.
    of the prerequisites in S0Ps and surveillance procedures were too
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-10.
    general. Interviews with licensee personnel indicated that it was
Procedure Revision
    not clear to them what was required to be verified to satisfy
to Include Check of Equipment Actuation on Control Room Ventilation
    selected prerequisites. By letter dated January 14, 1987, the
Start.
    licensee committed to implement additional controls of prerequisites
The inspector reviewed procedure 13301-1, which had been
    until the procedures were reviewed and modified to clarify prerequi-
revised in Rev.1 to include steps that verify that the outside air
    sites. The licensee stated that standing order 1-87-04 had been
supply dampers close on manual actuation of Control Room Toxic Gas
    issued to Operations to require that prior to initial use of any
Isolation.
    procedure being used in the control room the Shift Supervisor and
IFI 424/86-117-10 is closed.
    operator will review the prerequisites / initial conditions section
k.
    to ensure clarity and understanding of the required conditions. The
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-11.
    order contains provisions to upgrade prerequisites by submitting
Adequacy of
    comments / changes via an attachment to the letter.     Based on this
Procedure Prerequisites.
    commitment, IFI 424/86-117-11 is closed.
The inspectors had identified that scme
of the prerequisites in S0Ps and surveillance procedures were too
general.
Interviews with licensee personnel indicated that it was
not clear to them what was required to be verified to satisfy
selected prerequisites.
By letter dated January 14, 1987, the
licensee committed to implement additional controls of prerequisites
until the procedures were reviewed and modified to clarify prerequi-
sites.
The licensee stated that standing order 1-87-04 had been
issued to Operations to require that prior to initial use of any
procedure being used in the control room the Shift Supervisor and
operator will review the prerequisites / initial conditions section
to ensure clarity and understanding of the required conditions. The
order contains provisions to upgrade prerequisites by submitting
comments / changes via an attachment to the letter.
Based on this
commitment, IFI 424/86-117-11 is closed.


                                  .             .       _   -.     ._.   _ _ _ _ _
.
                                      28
.
_
-.
._.
_ _ _ _ _
28
,
,
  f
f
    1. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-12. Clarification of
1.
      Cleanliness Levels. The IFI involved clarification of the cleanli-
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-12.
'
Clarification of
      ness zone designations in Section 4.1.d of procedure 00254-C, Plant
Cleanliness Levels.
      Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control, to ensure that all open RCS
The IFI involved clarification of the cleanli-
:     components, as well as the refueling cavity, would be classified as
ness zone designations in Section 4.1.d of procedure 00254-C, Plant
      Level II. The licensee revised the Level II cleanliness requirements
'
      in 00254-C, Section 5.4, to specifically include any system that
Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control, to ensure that all open RCS
      could allow contaminates to reach the RCS. This revision meets the
:
      intent of the IFI and IFI 424/86-117-12 is closed,
components, as well as the refueling cavity, would be classified as
i
Level II. The licensee revised the Level II cleanliness requirements
! m. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-13. General Review
in 00254-C, Section 5.4, to specifically include any system that
i     of Abnormal Operating Procedures. Topics from Regulatory Guide
could allow contaminates to reach the RCS.
      1.33, Revision 2, February 1978, were verified to have procedures
This revision meets the
      established. The following contingencies were implemented by the
intent of the IFI and IFI 424/86-117-12 is closed,
      procedures listed below:
i
l                                                   Procedure Revision
!
                            Event                     Number   Number
m.
      Loss of Condenser Vacuum                   - 18011-1     1
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-13.
                                                      18023-1     1
General Review
      Loss of Containment Integrity               - 17005-1     2
i
:     Loss of Feedwater                           - 17009-1     0
of Abnormal Operating Procedures.
                                                      18016-1     1
Topics from Regulatory Guide
1.33, Revision 2, February 1978, were verified to have procedures
established.
The following contingencies were implemented by the
procedures listed below:
l
Procedure Revision
Event
Number
Number
Loss of Condenser Vacuum
- 18011-1
1
18023-1
1
Loss of Containment Integrity
- 17005-1
2
:
Loss of Feedwater
- 17009-1
0
18016-1
1
Conditions Requiring Emerg. Boration
- 17010-1
3
>
>
      Conditions Requiring Emerg. Boration        - 17010-1     3
18007-1
                                                      18007-1    1
1
      Fuel Cladding Failure                       - 17005-1     2
Fuel Cladding Failure
                                                      18006-1     1
- 17005-1
      High Activity in Coolant or Offgas         - 17100-1     2
2
,                                                    17213-1     0
18006-1
                                                      18009-1     2
1
      Pressure Control Malfunction               - 18011-1     1
High Activity in Coolant or Offgas
      Plant Fires                                 - 17103-C     0
- 17100-1
,                                                    18038-1     2
2
i     Abnormal Releases of Radioactivity         - 18009-1     2
17213-1
:
0
j     Based on this review, procedural implementation of Regulatory
,
'
18009-1
      Guide 1.33 is adequate and IFI 424/86-117-13 is closed.
2
    n. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-14. Annunciator Response
Pressure Control Malfunction
      Procedure (ARP) Discrepancies. The inspector reviewed the licensee's
- 18011-1
      commitment to conduct a review of ARP's to determine the adequacy of
1
      initial operator actions, the accuracy of window labelling, and the
Plant Fires
      overall adequacy of each procedure.     The inspector reviewed Main
- 17103-C
      Control Board (MCB) ARP's (panels 1 through 20) and concluded that a
0
      thorough review had been performed on these procedures and the
18038-1
      procedures accurately reflected the annunciator windows and provided
2
      sufficient initial operator action.     The inspector also reviewed
,
,
i
      several of the review packagos for the annunciator panels, particu-
Abnormal Releases of Radioactivity
- 18009-1
2
:
j
Based on this review, procedural implementation of Regulatory
'
Guide 1.33 is adequate and IFI 424/86-117-13 is closed.
n.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-14. Annunciator Response
Procedure (ARP) Discrepancies. The inspector reviewed the licensee's
commitment to conduct a review of ARP's to determine the adequacy of
initial operator actions, the accuracy of window labelling, and the
overall adequacy of each procedure.
The inspector reviewed Main
Control Board (MCB) ARP's (panels 1 through 20) and concluded that a
thorough review had been performed on these procedures and the
procedures accurately reflected the annunciator windows and provided
sufficient initial operator action.
The inspector also reviewed
several of the review packagos for the annunciator panels, particu-
,
'
'
      larly those on the MCB. All of the reviews appeared to be comprehen-
larly those on the MCB. All of the reviews appeared to be comprehen-
      sive and competent. Although the ARP's for the annunciators that are
sive and competent. Although the ARP's for the annunciators that are
(
(
- - .
- . - - - -
-
.
.
- -
- - - -
-
- -
.
- - -
- -
.
- . . - - - - . - . .
- -
-


                                                          .-
.-
                                                  29
29
                                                                                      !
!
        not on the MCB have not all been revised as yet; the reviews that
not on the MCB have not all been revised as yet; the reviews that
        were completed were adequate and the licensee program for completion
were completed were adequate and the licensee program for completion
        of the reviews was determined to be adequate.       Therefore, IFI
of the reviews was determined to be adequate.
        424/86-117-14 is closed.
Therefore, IFI
        During the review of the corrective action for IFI 424/86-117-14,
424/86-117-14 is closed.
        the inspector detennined that the ARPs referenced a Master Setpoint
During the review of the corrective action for IFI 424/86-117-14,
        Document in lieu of giving an actual setpoint for certain annunciator
the inspector detennined that the ARPs referenced a Master Setpoint
        alarms. Interviews with several operators indicated that they did
Document in lieu of giving an actual setpoint for certain annunciator
        not know where to find this document. In addition, personnel in the
alarms.
        Operations Department were not sure as to the exact form or location
Interviews with several operators indicated that they did
        of this document. Followup on the licensee's actions to establish
not know where to find this document.
        the document or to replace the references to the document in the
In addition, personnel in the
        ARP's with the actual setpoint was identified as IFI 424/87-01-07.
Operations Department were not sure as to the exact form or location
        This IFI was subsequently reviewed during this inspection and the
of this document.
        inspector determined that the licensee had taken corrective action
Followup on the licensee's actions to establish
        for the IFI. This review is documented under paragraph 12.nn for IFI
the document or to replace the references to the document in the
        424/87-01-07 in this report.
ARP's with the actual setpoint was identified as IFI 424/87-01-07.
    o. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-15. Acceptability of
This IFI was subsequently reviewed during this inspection and the
        Baseline IST Data for Section XI ASME Pump Testing. This item
inspector determined that the licensee had taken corrective action
        concerned baseline data obtained on four of six Component Cooling
for the IFI. This review is documented under paragraph 12.nn for IFI
        Water (CCW) pumps which was below the data obtained during preopera-
424/87-01-07 in this report.
        tional testing.     The inspector requested engineering justification
o.
        for the operability of these pumps prior to fuel load. The inspector
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-15.
        discussed with the licensee the ASME Section XI code, the licensee's
Acceptability of
        ISI program, the inherent error in the measuring equipment, and the
Baseline IST Data for Section XI ASME Pump Testing.
        configuration of the preoperational test versus that of the ISI test.
This item
        Pump curves from the manufacturer were compared with the preopera-
concerned baseline data obtained on four of six Component Cooling
        tional data and the baseline data. The licensee provided adequate
Water (CCW) pumps which was below the data obtained during preopera-
        justification as to the operability of the CCW pumps in question.
tional testing.
,      IFI 424/86-117-15 is closed.
The inspector requested engineering justification
    p. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-16. Technical Specifica-
for the operability of these pumps prior to fuel load. The inspector
        tion on the Discharge Flow of the RHR Pump. The inspector had
discussed with the licensee the ASME Section XI code, the licensee's
        determined that the discharge pressure on the recirculation flow of
ISI program, the inherent error in the measuring equipment, and the
        RHR pump B was equal to 180 psid. TS 4.2.5.f required the discharge
configuration of the preoperational test versus that of the ISI test.
Pump curves from the manufacturer were compared with the preopera-
tional data and the baseline data.
The licensee provided adequate
justification as to the operability of the CCW pumps in question.
IFI 424/86-117-15 is closed.
,
,
        pressure to be 1180 psid. The licensee had stated that a TS revision
p.
        had been requested to change the value to be 1165 psid. The inspec-
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-16. Technical Specifica-
        tor subsequently reviewed the TS revision whIch incorporated the
tion on the Discharge Flow of the RHR Pump.
The inspector had
determined that the discharge pressure on the recirculation flow of
RHR pump B was equal to 180 psid. TS 4.2.5.f required the discharge
pressure to be 1180 psid. The licensee had stated that a TS revision
,
had been requested to change the value to be 1165 psid. The inspec-
tor subsequently reviewed the TS revision whIch incorporated the
change.
IFI 424/86-117-16 is closed,
-
q.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-17.
Resolution of Water
Hanner in NSCW. The item concerned the waterhammer that had occurred
on the NSCW system during the Loss of Offsite Power test.
The
licensee's analysis, which concluded that the waterhammer did not
impair the operability of the system, was reviewed and found to be
acceptable.
IFI 424/86-117-17 is closed.
.-
_
-
-
.- - - -. - -- - - -
-
-
        change. IFI 424/86-117-16 is closed,
. . . - -
    q. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-17. Resolution of Water
.
        Hanner in NSCW. The item concerned the waterhammer that had occurred
.
        on the NSCW system during the Loss of Offsite Power test. The
--
        licensee's analysis, which concluded that the waterhammer did not
        impair the operability of the system, was reviewed and found to be
        acceptable. IFI 424/86-117-17 is closed.
                      -
  .-                      -
                              .-_- - -. - -- - - -                  . . . - -    --
            _
                                                                                .
                                                                -            .


                                                                                            :
30
                                            30
r.
        r.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-18. Implementation of
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-18.
              Surveillance Program.     During the inspection ending December 12,
Implementation of
              1986, the inspectors had determined that the licensee had not yet
Surveillance Program.
              fully implemented the surveillance program administrative controls
During the inspection ending December 12,
              except on a small number of systems which had been accepted by the
1986, the inspectors had determined that the licensee had not yet
              Operations Department.     During this inspection, the inspectors
fully implemented the surveillance program administrative controls
              reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number
except on a small number of systems which had been accepted by the
              of additional surveillance test packages. Although several concerns
Operations Department.
              were identified and one example of a failure to follow procedure was
During this inspection, the inspectors
              identified; in general, the results of this review indicated that the
reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number
              surveillance program was adequately implemented.       The review is
of additional surveillance test packages. Although several concerns
              documented in paragraph 7 of this report.       IFI 424/86-117-18 is
were identified and one example of a failure to follow procedure was
              closed.
identified; in general, the results of this review indicated that the
        s.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-19.       Review of Test
surveillance program was adequately implemented.
              Control and Implementation of Configuration Control during
The review is
              Performance of Surveillance Testing.     The inspectors had determined
documented in paragraph 7 of this report.
              that in some surveillances performed during the preoperational
IFI 424/86-117-18 is
              testing, the prerequisites were not always satisfied prior to
closed.
              beginning the test. It was not clear in the cases reviewed whether
s.
              or not credit would be taken for the test. The inspectors reviewed a
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-19.
              number of completed surveillance packages and observed additional
Review of Test
              performances of surveillance testing. No additional instances of
Control and Implementation of Configuration Control during
              failure to satisfy prerequisites or establish system configuration
Performance of Surveillance Testing.
              were noted.   The inspector rereviewed the performance of the MDAFW
The inspectors had determined
              surveillance procedure,14807, and determined that the system had
that in some surveillances performed during the preoperational
              been retested. Additional information on the review of the surveil-
testing, the prerequisites were not always satisfied prior to
              lance program is provided in paragraph 7. IFI 424/86-117-19 is
beginning the test.
              closed,
It was not clear in the cases reviewed whether
          t. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-20.     Revise Procedures to
or not credit would be taken for the test. The inspectors reviewed a
              Clarify Use of Staggered Test Basis for Determining Frequency of
number of completed surveillance packages and observed additional
              Test. The inspector had determined that although the Surveillance
performances of surveillance testing.
              Test Coordinator was correctly tracking surveillances required on a
No additional instances of
              staggered test basis, the test frequencies specified in certain
failure to satisfy prerequisites or establish system configuration
              surveillance procedures did not mention the requirement for stagger-
were noted.
              ing the tests.     The inspector determined that procedure 00404-C,
The inspector rereviewed the performance of the MDAFW
              Surveillance Test Program, has been revised to include the TS
surveillance procedure,14807, and determined that the system had
              definition of staggered test basis.       The inspector reviewed the
been retested.
              deficient procedures identified and determined that the surveillance
Additional information on the review of the surveil-
              procedures had been revised to specify that the tests are to be
lance program is provided in paragraph 7.
              performed on a staggered test basis where appropriate.               IFI
IFI 424/86-117-19 is
              424/86-117-20 is closed.
closed,
        u.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-21.           Review of
t.
              Justifications for Use of Preoperational Tests to Meet TS
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-20.
              Surveillance Requirements.       The inspectors reviewed the
Revise Procedures to
              preoperational test data used to take credit for the 18 month
Clarify Use of Staggered Test Basis for Determining Frequency of
              surveillance tests of the emergency diesel generators (EDG) and
Test.
              the battery chargers.     The inspectors reviewed the pre-op tests
The inspector had determined that although the Surveillance
              with the engineers responsible for the EDGs and the battery
Test Coordinator was correctly tracking surveillances required on a
- _ _ . ._     _                       _           _           _           , . _
staggered test basis, the test frequencies specified in certain
                                                                                        . __
surveillance procedures did not mention the requirement for stagger-
ing the tests.
The inspector determined that procedure 00404-C,
Surveillance Test Program, has been revised to include the TS
definition of staggered test basis.
The inspector reviewed the
deficient procedures identified and determined that the surveillance
procedures had been revised to specify that the tests are to be
performed on a staggered test basis where appropriate.
IFI
424/86-117-20 is closed.
u.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-21.
Review of
Justifications for Use of Preoperational Tests to Meet TS
Surveillance Requirements.
The
inspectors
reviewed the
preoperational test data used to take credit for the 18 month
surveillance tests of the emergency diesel generators (EDG) and
the battery chargers.
The inspectors reviewed the pre-op tests
with the engineers responsible for the EDGs and the battery
- _ _ .
._
_
_
_
_
, . _
. __


                                                    31
31
                chargers. The review included a step by step table-top walkthrough
chargers.
                uf the effected surveillances with a comparison of the pre-op data
The review included a step by step table-top walkthrough
                used to take credit for required data in the surveillances.                       In both
uf the effected surveillances with a comparison of the pre-op data
                cases the inspectors determined that the pre-op data appeared to be a
used to take credit for required data in the surveillances.
                valid substitute for the data required for the surveillance and that
In both
                the licensee did an adequate job in the justification of the use of
cases the inspectors determined that the pre-op data appeared to be a
                the pre-op data. The inspector discussed the controls with the
valid substitute for the data required for the surveillance and that
                licensee which will be utilized for assuring that startup tests are
the licensee did an adequate job in the justification of the use of
                appropriately evaluated if the tests are to be used in lieu of
the pre-op data.
                surveillance tests. The inspector determined that the licensee made
The inspector discussed the controls with the
                significant improvements in the evaluation of the use of other tests
licensee which will be utilized for assuring that startup tests are
                in lieu of surveillance tests and took steps to assure that surveil-
appropriately evaluated if the tests are to be used in lieu of
                lance tests were performed in those cases where other tests did not
surveillance tests.
                satisfy the surveillance test requirements.           The inspector had no
The inspector determined that the licensee made
                additional questions. IFI 424/86-117-21 is closed.
significant improvements in the evaluation of the use of other tests
          v.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-22. Corrective Action to
in lieu of surveillance tests and took steps to assure that surveil-
                Assure Control of Twelve Hour Surveillances. The inspector reviewed
lance tests were performed in those cases where other tests did not
                procedure 14000-1, Rev. 3, Operations Shift and Daily Surveillance
satisfy the surveillance test requirements.
                Logs, which now specify that surveillances be performed within
The inspector had no
                two hours of each shift. Procedure 10000-C, Rev. 3, Conduct of
additional questions.
                Operations, had been revised to require that the On Shift Operations
IFI 424/86-117-21 is closed.
                Supervisor or the Shift Supervi::or ensure that procedure 14000-1
v.
                be performed within the first two hours of each shift.                   IFI
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-22. Corrective Action to
                424/86-117-22 is closed.
Assure Control of Twelve Hour Surveillances. The inspector reviewed
          w.   (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-23.             Miscellaneous
procedure 14000-1, Rev. 3, Operations Shift and Daily Surveillance
                Technical Issues Identified in Review of Surveillance Program.
Logs, which now specify that surveillances be performed within
                This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified
two hours of each shift.
                during the review of surveillance procedures and/or surveillance
Procedure 10000-C, Rev. 3, Conduct of
                program implementation. Each concern is identified separately below
Operations, had been revised to require that the On Shift Operations
                by the paragraph number in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
Supervisor or the Shift Supervi::or ensure that procedure 14000-1
                Paragraph 7.c.         Procedure 14721-1 required SI pumps to be operated
be performed within the first two hours of each shift.
                during the test; however, there was no provision to open and rack out
IFI
                the motor supply breakers upon test completion. TS 4.5.3.2 requires
424/86-117-22 is closed.
                the motor supply breakers to be open while in Modes 4, 5 and 6. The
w.
                inspector was shown a draft revision to the procedure which included
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-23.
                adequate steps. The procedure additionally specified that maximum
Miscellaneous
                allowed flow was 650 gpm although TS 4.5.2.h.2.b allows up to 660
Technical Issues Identified in Review of Surveillance Program.
                gpm. Although the requirement was conservative, it was inconsistent
This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified
                with other requirements in the procedure. The same draft revision
during the review of surveillance procedures and/or surveillance
                also corrected the allowable flew to 660 gpm. Procedure 14460-1 did
program implementation.
                not require venting through valve 1-1204-X4-827, SI Pump Miniflow                                                   I
Each concern is identified separately below
                Vent Valve. TS 4.5.2.b.1 requires the venting of ECCS pump discharge                                                 !
by the paragraph number in Inspection Report 424/86-117.
                piping high points at least once per 31 days. The applicant stated
Paragraph 7.c.
                that a Temporary Change Procedure (TCP) would be initiated. The
Procedure 14721-1 required SI pumps to be operated
                procedure additionally referred to the A SI pump as 1. The inspector                                                 I
during the test; however, there was no provision to open and rack out
                verified that the procedure was corrected. Procedure 14000-1 did not                                                 l
the motor supply breakers upon test completion. TS 4.5.3.2 requires
                specify that the surveillances on page 17 were to be performed in                                                   !
the motor supply breakers to be open while in Modes 4, 5 and 6.
                modes 1 or 2 only. The inspector verified that the procedure was
The
                                    v
inspector was shown a draft revision to the procedure which included
                                      .vr
adequate steps.
_ _ _ _ _  ___        _____ _ ____        _                                      . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The procedure additionally specified that maximum
allowed flow was 650 gpm although TS 4.5.2.h.2.b allows up to 660
gpm.
Although the requirement was conservative, it was inconsistent
with other requirements in the procedure.
The same draft revision
also corrected the allowable flew to 660 gpm.
Procedure 14460-1 did
not require venting through valve 1-1204-X4-827, SI Pump Miniflow
Vent Valve. TS 4.5.2.b.1 requires the venting of ECCS pump discharge
piping high points at least once per 31 days.
The applicant stated
that a Temporary Change Procedure (TCP) would be initiated.
The
procedure additionally referred to the A SI pump as 1.
The inspector
verified that the procedure was corrected.
Procedure 14000-1 did not
specify that the surveillances on page 17 were to be performed in
modes 1 or 2 only.
The inspector verified that the procedure was
v
.vr
.
.
.


                              32
32
corrected. The correction of minor comments on procedures 54821-1,
corrected.
The correction of minor comments on procedures 54821-1,
which referenced a deleted TS table, and 55016-1, which contained a
which referenced a deleted TS table, and 55016-1, which contained a
typographical error in a TS reference, was verified. The comments on
typographical error in a TS reference, was verified. The comments on
the surveillance procedures for the safety injection system in IFI
the surveillance procedures for the safety injection system in IFI
424/86-117-23 are considered closed.
424/86-117-23 are considered closed.
Paragraph 7.e. A review of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test
Paragraph 7.e.
Program, Rev. 2, dated December 3, 1986; 00405-C, Commitment
A review of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test
Identification, Tracking, and Implementation, Rev. 3, dated
Program, Rev.
2,
dated December 3,
1986; 00405-C, Commitment
Identification, Tracking, and Implementation, Rev.
3,
dated
October 22, 1986; and 00051-C, Procedures Review and Approval,
October 22, 1986; and 00051-C, Procedures Review and Approval,
Rev. 5, dated December 1,1986 indicated that the mechanisms to
Rev. 5, dated December 1,1986 indicated that the mechanisms to
govern changes to procedures which implement technical specification
govern changes to procedures which implement technical specification
commitments and changes to technical specification commitments which
commitments and changes to technical specification commitments which
are implemented in procedures were in place. The aforementioned
are implemented in procedures were in place.
The aforementioned
procedures will ensure that if changes occur, the changes will be
procedures will ensure that if changes occur, the changes will be
reflected in the surveillance task cross reference report and the
reflected in the surveillance task cross reference report and the
master surveillance report.     It should be noted that procedure
master surveillance report.
It should be noted that procedure
14935-1, Rev. I draft, which prompted this concern, was approved. A
14935-1, Rev. I draft, which prompted this concern, was approved. A
review of the associated paper work revealed that the individual
review of the associated paper work revealed that the individual
responsible for the commitment review failed to identify the deletion
responsible for the commitment review failed to identify the deletion
of a commitment.     The appropriate corrections were made when the
of a commitment.
The appropriate corrections were made when the
error was identified to the reviewer. This part of IFI 424/85-117-23
error was identified to the reviewer. This part of IFI 424/85-117-23
is closed.
is closed.
A review of procedure 14721-1, ECCS Subsystem Flow Balance Test,
A review of procedure 14721-1, ECCS Subsystem Flow Balance Test,
Rev.1, dated January 2,1987, discloses a revision which changes
Rev.1, dated January 2,1987, discloses a revision which changes
the applicability of the procedure to modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.       This
the applicability of the procedure to modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.
is consistent with TS 4.5.2 and 4.5.3.1.         This part of IFI
This
is consistent with TS 4.5.2 and 4.5.3.1.
This part of IFI
424/86-117-23 is closed.
424/86-117-23 is closed.
Paragraph 7.f. Section 6.0, Acceptance Criteria, in both revisions
Paragraph 7.f.
Section 6.0, Acceptance Criteria, in both revisions
of procedure 14806-1 did not include observation of proper lubricant
of procedure 14806-1 did not include observation of proper lubricant
level or check of calibration due dates. Section 8.0 of draft Rev.1
level or check of calibration due dates. Section 8.0 of draft Rev.1
did not include the date of the applicable edition of ASME B&PV code,
did not include the date of the applicable edition of ASME B&PV code,
Section XI. The inspector verified that these items had been
Section XI.
The inspector verified that these items had been
corrected. These comments are considered closed. Procedure 54701-1:
corrected. These comments are considered closed. Procedure 54701-1:
(1) did not meet the requirements of TS 4.8.4.2.b, (2) failed to
(1) did not meet the requirements of TS 4.8.4.2.b, (2) failed to
Line 1,679: Line 2,485:
tion of the test, (3) did not include a step to unlock and close
tion of the test, (3) did not include a step to unlock and close
valve 1-1204-U6-018, and (4) did not include independent verification
valve 1-1204-U6-018, and (4) did not include independent verification
of the position of 1-1206-U6-018.       The inspector verified that
of the position of 1-1206-U6-018.
the licensee had corrected these items.         This portion of IFI
The inspector verified that
the licensee had corrected these items.
This portion of IFI
424/86-117-23 is closed.
424/86-117-23 is closed.
Paragraph 7.g. The valve numbers in TS 3/4.6.1.7 were incorrect.
Paragraph 7.g.
The valve numbers in TS 3/4.6.1.7 were incorrect.
Valves HV-2624 A and B, 4 inch isolation valves in the Containment
Valves HV-2624 A and B, 4 inch isolation valves in the Containment
Building Post LOCA Exhaust system; and, HV-2627 A and B and HV-2629 A
Building Post LOCA Exhaust system; and, HV-2627 A and B and HV-2629 A
Line 1,689: Line 2,498:
lance requirement 4.6.1.7.1 were not all 24-inch containment purge
lance requirement 4.6.1.7.1 were not all 24-inch containment purge


                                  33
33
  and exhaust isolation valves as indicated. HV-2624 A and 8 were 4
and exhaust isolation valves as indicated.
  inch Containment Building Post LOCA Exhaust isolation valves.
HV-2624 A and 8 were 4
  HV-26268 and HV-26-288 were 14-inch Containment Building mini-purge
inch Containment Building Post LOCA Exhaust isolation valves.
  supply and exhaust isolation valves. The inspector verified that the
HV-26268 and HV-26-288 were 14-inch Containment Building mini-purge
  numbers in the TS were corrected. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23
supply and exhaust isolation valves. The inspector verified that the
  is closed.
numbers in the TS were corrected.
  Paragraph 7.h.     The reference to paragraph 7.h in Inspection
This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23
  Report 424/86-117 was a typographical error. Coments in this
is closed.
  section were evaluated and no followup was considered necessary.
Paragraph 7.h.
  Paragraph 7.i. While witnessing the MDAFWP testing, the inspector
The reference to paragraph 7.h in Inspection
  noted in procedure 14807 that no step was included in the system
Report 424/86-117 was a typographical error.
  restoration to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic. The
Coments in this
  system restoration section of procedure 14807, Rev.1, now includes a
section were evaluated and no followup was considered necessary.
  step to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic at the conclu-
Paragraph 7.i.
  sion of the MDAFW surveillance test, and to independently verify this
While witnessing the MDAFWP testing, the inspector
  step. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 is closed.
noted in procedure 14807 that no step was included in the system
  Paragraph 7.J. The inspector noted that the physics curve book
restoration to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic.
  had not been completed.       During a subsequent inspection, the
The
  inspector determined that the physics curve book was near completion.
system restoration section of procedure 14807, Rev.1, now includes a
  The majority of the reactivity data, which had been extracted from
step to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic at the conclu-
  WCAP-11338 and reformatted, had been provided to Reactor Engineering
sion of the MDAFW surveillance test, and to independently verify this
  for review. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 will remain open until
step. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 is closed.
  completion of the curve book is reviewed.
Paragraph 7.J.
x. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-24. Implementation
The inspector noted that the physics curve book
  of the Operational Phase Corrective and Preventive Maintenance
had not been completed.
  Program. This item is closed as discussed in paragraph 8 of this
During a subsequent inspection, the
  report,
inspector determined that the physics curve book was near completion.
y. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-25. Ultimate Heat Sink
The majority of the reactivity data, which had been extracted from
  Technical Specification Clarification.     A revision was to be made to
WCAP-11338 and reformatted, had been provided to Reactor Engineering
  the ultimate heat sink TS to clarify the wording, remove ambiguities,
for review. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 will remain open until
  and modify a surveillance so that it could be realistically met. The
completion of the curve book is reviewed.
  inspector determined that the changes had been approved and would be
x.
  included in the TS. IFI 424/86-117-25 is closed.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-24.
z. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-26. Verification of
Implementation
  Position of BIT Isolation Valves.     A review of procedure 11006-1,
of the Operational Phase Corrective and Preventive Maintenance
  Chemical and Volume Control System Alignment for Start-up and Normal
Program.
  Operation, Rev. 3, dated December 29, 1986, contains a revision which
This item is closed as discussed in paragraph 8 of this
  calls for the verification of BIT isolation valves 1-HV 9803 A & B
report,
  in the open position with the Limitorque handwheel lon ed. This
y.
  revision satisfies TS requirement 4.5.2.b.2 by designating these
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-25.
  valves, which are in the ECCS flow path, as locked valves, thereby
Ultimate Heat Sink
  excluding them from the 31 day correct position verification. The
Technical Specification Clarification.
  inspector field verified that the appropriate locks were installed.
A revision was to be made to
  IFI 424/86-117-26 is closed.
the ultimate heat sink TS to clarify the wording, remove ambiguities,
and modify a surveillance so that it could be realistically met. The
inspector determined that the changes had been approved and would be
included in the TS.
IFI 424/86-117-25 is closed.
z.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-26.
Verification of
Position of BIT Isolation Valves.
A review of procedure 11006-1,
Chemical and Volume Control System Alignment for Start-up and Normal
Operation, Rev. 3, dated December 29, 1986, contains a revision which
calls for the verification of BIT isolation valves 1-HV 9803 A & B
in the open position with the Limitorque handwheel lon ed.
This
revision satisfies TS requirement 4.5.2.b.2 by designating these
valves, which are in the ECCS flow path, as locked valves, thereby
excluding them from the 31 day correct position verification.
The
inspector field verified that the appropriate locks were installed.
IFI 424/86-117-26 is closed.


                                  34
34
aa. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Items 424/86-117-27. TS / Surveillance
aa.
    Procedure Cross Reference List and Surveillance Procedure Completion.
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Items 424/86-117-27.
    Some procedures referenced in the TS / surveillance procedure cross
TS / Surveillance
    reference list had not been written and/or had not been identified in
Procedure Cross Reference List and Surveillance Procedure Completion.
    the cross reference list. Procedure 53002-C was shown in the cross
Some procedures referenced in the TS / surveillance procedure cross
    reference list for BOL moderator temperature coefficient surveillance
reference list had not been written and/or had not been identified in
    (TS 4.1.1.3.a) but the licensee did not plan to use the procedure for
the cross reference list.
    the initial startup test and it had not been written. This procedure
Procedure 53002-C was shown in the cross
    will be an integrated low power physics testing procedure to be used
reference list for BOL moderator temperature coefficient surveillance
    for reloads. The inspectors confirmed that the procedure to be used
(TS 4.1.1.3.a) but the licensee did not plan to use the procedure for
    was adequate to meet the surveillance requirements. The TS cross
the initial startup test and it had not been written. This procedure
    reference list did not show which startup tests are used to satisfy
will be an integrated low power physics testing procedure to be used
    surveillance requirements. Startup testing will be observed in
for reloads.
    future inspections.
The inspectors confirmed that the procedure to be used
    The inspectors reviewed a portion of the cross reference list to
was adequate to meet the surveillance requirements.
    confirm that procedures required for Mode 6 had been identified
The TS cross
    and completed.     The inspectors provided several minor comments to
reference list did not show which startup tests are used to satisfy
    the licensee for resolution, but determined that the cross reference
surveillance requirements.
    list was adequate for startup.     IFI 424/86-117-27 will remain open
Startup testing will be observed in
    pending further review of the status of procedures required for power
future inspections.
    operation.     IFI 424/86-96-05, which involved the review of the
The inspectors reviewed a portion of the cross reference list to
    completion of procedures required to meet TS surveillances, is
confirm that procedures required for Mode 6 had been identified
    closely related to IFI 424/86-117-27.     Based on the review of the
and completed.
    surveillance program documented in paragraph 7 and the followup to be
The inspectors provided several minor comments to
    conducted to close IFI 424/86-117-27, IFI 424/86-96-05 is closed.
the licensee for resolution, but determined that the cross reference
bb. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-96-05. Review of Surveil-
list was adequate for startup.
    lance Procedure Completion. This item is closed as documented in
IFI 424/86-117-27 will remain open
    paragraph 12.aa.
pending further review of the status of procedures required for power
cc. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-28.     Procedure Revision
operation.
    for Consistent Definition of Surveillance Test Completion Date and
IFI 424/86-96-05, which involved the review of the
    Time. Administrative surveillance tracking procedure 00404-C, was
completion of procedures required to meet TS surveillances, is
    revised by Revision 4 to correct a discrepancy between Section 2.5
closely related to IFI 424/86-117-27.
    and its surveillance task sheet completion instructions, note 20,
Based on the review of the
    concerning the surveillance official completion date and time. A
surveillance program documented in paragraph 7 and the followup to be
    surveillance test is now consistently considered complete only after
conducted to close IFI 424/86-117-27, IFI 424/86-96-05 is closed.
    the test results have been reviewed. Therefore, IFI 424/86-117-28 is
bb.
    closed.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-96-05.
dd. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-29. Review of Special
Review of Surveil-
    Condition Surveillance Test Triggering Mechanisms. The inspector
lance Procedure Completion.
    reviewed documentation to determine whether or not the applicant has
This item is closed as documented in
    adequate triggering mechanisms to ensure certain special condition
paragraph 12.aa.
    surveillances are performed. A computer printout listing all special
cc.
    condition surveillances for mode 6 and all modes was reviewed. The
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-28.
    list contained approximately 112 surveillance requirements, the
Procedure Revision
    department responsible for triggering, the department responsible for
for Consistent Definition of Surveillance Test Completion Date and
Time.
Administrative surveillance tracking procedure 00404-C, was
revised by Revision 4 to correct a discrepancy between Section 2.5
and its surveillance task sheet completion instructions, note 20,
concerning the surveillance official completion date and time.
A
surveillance test is now consistently considered complete only after
the test results have been reviewed. Therefore, IFI 424/86-117-28 is
closed.
dd.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-29.
Review of Special
Condition Surveillance Test Triggering Mechanisms.
The inspector
reviewed documentation to determine whether or not the applicant has
adequate triggering mechanisms to ensure certain special condition
surveillances are performed. A computer printout listing all special
condition surveillances for mode 6 and all modes was reviewed.
The
list contained approximately 112 surveillance requirements, the
department responsible for triggering, the department responsible for


.
.
.
.
                                      35
35
      completion, and the applicable procedures. The inspector audited 20
completion, and the applicable procedures. The inspector audited 20
      surveillance requirements to determine that adequate steps or
surveillance requirements to determine that adequate steps or
precautions had been inserted into the appropriate procedure to
'
'
      precautions had been inserted into the appropriate procedure to
trigger the required surveillance test.
      trigger the required surveillance test.
In all but one case either an adequate procedure existed, a Temporary
      In all but one case either an adequate procedure existed, a Temporary
Change Procedure (TCP) had been generated, or a revision was in the
      Change Procedure (TCP) had been generated, or a revision was in the
approval process which the inspector reviewed.
      approval process which the inspector reviewed. The inspector noted
The inspector noted
      one case where inadequate triggering mechanisms existed. Procedure
one case where inadequate triggering mechanisms existed.
      17034-1 did not contain a requirement to verify 125V battery opera-
Procedure
      bility after battery discharge or overcharge within 7 days as
17034-1 did not contain a requirement to verify 125V battery opera-
      required by TS 4.8.2.2. Although procedure 17034-1 had been desig-
bility after battery discharge or overcharge within 7 days as
      nated to have the triggering mechanisms for the maintenance
required by TS 4.8.2.2.
      department to perform the surveillance, the revision had not been
Although procedure 17034-1 had been desig-
      done. This was pointed out to the licensee. A TCP was immediately
nated to have the triggering mechanisms for the maintenance
      processed. The inspector reviewed the TCP and found that the change
department to perform the surveillance, the revision had not been
      incorporated the appropriate triggering mechanisms.
done.
!     The inspector reviewed methods and procedures for departments to
This was pointed out to the licensee.
;     keep track of special condition surveillances.       Draft procedure
A TCP was immediately
      50045-C, Engineering Special Condition Surveillances, was reviewed.
processed.
      The procedure included a log for keeping track of active surveil-
The inspector reviewed the TCP and found that the change
incorporated the appropriate triggering mechanisms.
!
The inspector reviewed methods and procedures for departments to
;
keep track of special condition surveillances.
Draft procedure
50045-C, Engineering Special Condition Surveillances, was reviewed.
The procedure included a log for keeping track of active surveil-
lances.
Discussions with responsible personnel indicated that the
,
,
      lances. Discussions with responsible personnel indicated that the
draft copy reviewed by the inspector was not finalized for approval
      draft copy reviewed by the inspector was not finalized for approval
and that additional EFPD sensitive surveillances, which were not
      and that additional EFPD sensitive surveillances, which were not
requirements for fuel load, were to be incorporated into the
      requirements for fuel load, were to be incorporated into the
procedure.
      procedure.   The inspector reviewed chemistry procedures 31045-C, Rev.
The inspector reviewed chemistry procedures 31045-C, Rev.
4, Chemistry Logkeeping, Filing, and Record Storage; and, 30040-C,
4
4
      4, Chemistry Logkeeping, Filing, and Record Storage; and, 30040-C,
Rev. 1, Reporting Chemistry Data to Operations Department.
      Rev. 1, Reporting Chemistry Data to Operations Department. The
The
      procedures were adequate to track surveillances in the Laboratory
procedures were adequate to track surveillances in the Laboratory
      Logbook. Special condition surveillances for the Instrumentation and
Logbook. Special condition surveillances for the Instrumentation and
i     Control Section were primarily associated with instrument calibra-
i
      tions after a seismic event and one associated with RCS pressure
Control Section were primarily associated with instrument calibra-
      calibration after refueling. The following procedures were reviewed:
tions after a seismic event and one associated with RCS pressure
      18036-C, Rev.0, Seismic Event; 50022-C, Rev. 3, Seismic Event Plan;
calibration after refueling. The following procedures were reviewed:
      55039-C, Rev. O, Seismic Monitoring Instrument System; 12000-1,
18036-C, Rev.0, Seismic Event; 50022-C, Rev. 3, Seismic Event Plan;
      Rev.1, Refueling Recovery. Items will be tracked through Operations
55039-C, Rev. O, Seismic Monitoring Instrument System; 12000-1,
      as equipment is placed inoperable. The Maintenance Department
Rev.1, Refueling Recovery.
      triggered all of their special condition surveillances through the
Items will be tracked through Operations
as equipment is placed inoperable.
The Maintenance Department
triggered all of their special condition surveillances through the
planning and work order programs and did not have a log to keep
,
,
      planning and work order programs and did not have a log to keep
track of active surveillances; however, procedure 20051-C, Rev. O,
      track of active surveillances; however, procedure 20051-C, Rev. O,
Maintenance Work Order Functional Tests, itemized surveillances to
      Maintenance Work Order Functional Tests, itemized surveillances to
be triggered after certain maintenance items.
      be triggered after certain maintenance items.       This was deemed
This was deemed
      adequate. IFI 424/86-117-29 is closed.
adequate.
  ee. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-30.       Control on the
IFI 424/86-117-29 is closed.
      Location of the B0P Operator. The inspector reviewed procedure
ee.
      10000-C, Rev. 3, which had been revised to state that the balance
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-30.
      of plant operator normally remains in the control room.         IFI
Control on the
      424/86-117-30 is closed.
Location of the B0P Operator.
4
The inspector reviewed procedure
10000-C, Rev. 3, which had been revised to state that the balance
of plant operator normally remains in the control room.
IFI
424/86-117-30 is closed.
4
- -
.
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
- .
- .
-
.
. - -
-
. . -
. - -
. .
- - - - -
-
-
. .


                                                                                l
l
                                                                                l
36
                                                                                l
ff. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-31.
                                                                                !
Key Control .
                                          36
On
    ff. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-31. Key Control . On
December 11, 1986, during the walk through of the reactor coolant
          December 11, 1986, during the walk through of the reactor coolant
pump loop 1F-416 procedure, 24790-1, the inspector had observed
          pump loop 1F-416 procedure, 24790-1, the inspector had observed
that the technician needed to go to the shif t clerk's office three
          that the technician needed to go to the shif t clerk's office three
times to obtain the keys needed to open the reactor solid state
          times to obtain the keys needed to open the reactor solid state
protection system (SSPS) cabinets to perform the surveillance
          protection system (SSPS) cabinets to perform the surveillance
procedure.
          procedure.   In a letter dated January 13, 1987, which referenced a
In a letter dated January 13, 1987, which referenced a
          memorandum dated January 8, 1987, the licensee stated that the
memorandum dated January 8, 1987, the licensee stated that the
  ,
control of keys to all panels and cabinets which require operator
          control of keys to all panels and cabinets which require operator
,
;
access would be reviewed and validated. The memorandum stated that a
          access would be reviewed and validated. The memorandum stated that a
;
          new key control cabinet had been added, that an up-to-date list of
new key control cabinet had been added, that an up-to-date list of
          keys had been completed and that the cabinet keys would be validated
keys had been completed and that the cabinet keys would be validated
          by February 6, 1987. By memorandum dated January 15, 1987, a copy of
by February 6, 1987. By memorandum dated January 15, 1987, a copy of
          which was provided to the inspectors, the licensee stated that the
which was provided to the inspectors, the licensee stated that the
          cabinet key controls would be in place by February 21, 1987. The
cabinet key controls would be in place by February 21, 1987.
          inspectors agreed that this date was acceptable. The memorandum also
The
inspectors agreed that this date was acceptable. The memorandum also
,
,
          stated in regard to locked doors inside the power block, that these
stated in regard to locked doors inside the power block, that these
          doors would routinely be left unlocked, except vital area doors,
~
~
          remote shutdown panel doors, essential 4160V AC switchgear room
doors would routinely be left unlocked, except vital area doors,
          doors and high radiation area doors.     Due to the types of locks
remote shutdown panel doors, essential 4160V AC switchgear room
          on some of the interior doors, the licensee stated that certain
doors and high radiation area doors.
          locks would have to replaced to allow the doors to be left unlocked.
Due to the types of locks
.
on some of the interior doors, the licensee stated that certain
          The licensee stated that the locks would be replaced by April 1,
locks would have to replaced to allow the doors to be left unlocked.
l         1987. IFI 424/86-117-31 will remain open until these actions are
.
          verified.
The licensee stated that the locks would be replaced by April 1,
    gg.   (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-32. Technical Specifica-
l
          tion Change to Reflect 18 Month Surveillance of Under Voltage and
1987.
          Shunt Trip Coils on Reactor Trip Breaker. The final TS draft did not
IFI 424/86-117-31 will remain open until these actions are
          specify testing of the reactor trip breaker undervoltage (UV) and
verified.
          shunt coils. Generic letter 83-28 required this testing to be
gg.
          performed with an 18 month frequency, as a minimum.     The inspector
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-32. Technical Specifica-
          verified that procedure 14701-1, Rev. 3, had been changed tn
tion Change to Reflect 18 Month Surveillance of Under Voltage and
          incorporate these items to test the reactor trip breakers unde -
Shunt Trip Coils on Reactor Trip Breaker. The final TS draft did not
          voltage and shunt trip. IFI 424/86-117-32 is closed.
specify testing of the reactor trip breaker undervoltage (UV) and
    hh.   (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-33.       Miscellaneous
shunt coils.
          Technical Issues Identified in Review of Operations Procedures.
Generic letter 83-28 required this testing to be
          This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified
performed with an 18 month frequency, as a minimum.
,        during the review of operations procedures. Each concern is identi-
The inspector
          fied separately below by the paragraph number in Inspection Report
verified that procedure 14701-1, Rev. 3, had been changed tn
          424/86-117.
incorporate these items to test the reactor trip breakers unde -
i        Paragraph 6.b.6. Two alarm panels were not displayed above the
voltage and shunt trip.
          CCW operating switches in the control room as required by 18020-1
IFI 424/86-117-32 is closed.
          and ARP 17002-1.     The inspector verified that the licensee had
hh.
          taken action to correct these discrepancies.     This portion of IFI
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-33.
          424/86-117-33 is closed.
Miscellaneous
Technical Issues Identified in Review of Operations Procedures.
This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified
during the review of operations procedures. Each concern is identi-
,
fied separately below by the paragraph number in Inspection Report
424/86-117.
Paragraph 6.b.6.
Two alarm panels were not displayed above the
i
CCW operating switches in the control room as required by 18020-1
and ARP 17002-1.
The inspector verified that the licensee had
taken action to correct these discrepancies.
This portion of IFI
424/86-117-33 is closed.
i
i
i
i
!
!
-
-
- - - - -
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
- -
- -
- - - -


r
r
                                                                                                                                              37
37
                                                                                                            Paragraph 6.b.7.     In procedure 18003-1 the following coments were
Paragraph 6.b.7.
                                                                                                            made.     In step 4.1.2.9, which repeats a reactor coolant pump start
In procedure 18003-1 the following coments were
                                                                                                            sequence, no reference was made to the reactor coolant pump restart
made.
                                                                                                            limitations identified by precautions 2.2.11.2 and 2.2.11.3.       The
In step 4.1.2.9, which repeats a reactor coolant pump start
                                                                                                            seal injection flow shown on Figure 1 showed six to eight gpm,
sequence, no reference was made to the reactor coolant pump restart
                                                                                                            whereas item 2.2.6 specified 8 to 13 gpm. The flow logic in the
limitations identified by precautions 2.2.11.2 and 2.2.11.3.
                                                                                                            decision tree depicted in Figure 1 failed at both the " check No. 2
The
                                                                                                            seal leakoff flow" block and at the " check injection and bearing
seal injection flow shown on Figure 1 showed six to eight gpm,
                                                                                                            temperature" block since neither block provided a logical exit from
whereas item 2.2.6 specified 8 to 13 gpm.
                                                                                                            the block. The inspector verified that procedure 18004-1, Rev. 2,
The flow logic in the
                                                                                                            corrected the:e items. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.
decision tree depicted in Figure 1 failed at both the " check No. 2
                                                                                                            Paragraph 6.b.9.       The inspector had identified concerns in that
seal leakoff flow" block and at the " check injection and bearing
                                                                                                            procedure 13610-1 did not contain provisions for monitoring and
temperature" block since neither block provided a logical exit from
                                                                                                            responding to adverse bearing oil temperatures for all three AFW
the block.
                                                                                                            pumps and did not implement provisions for positioning and aligning
The inspector verified that procedure 18004-1, Rev. 2,
                                                                                                            the turbine driven AFW pump overspeed test switch (HS-15130) and
corrected the:e items. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.
                                                                                                            speed control potentiometer. During a walkdown of the AFW system,
Paragraph 6.b.9.
                                                                                                            the inspectors noted that the turbine driven pump gland seal leakage
The inspector had identified concerns in that
                                                                                                            was approximately 3 to 5 times greater than that of the motor driven
procedure 13610-1 did not contain provisions for monitoring and
                                                                                                            pumps and appeared to be excessive. The licensee acknowledged the
responding to adverse bearing oil temperatures for all three AFW
                                                                                                            concern.     Procedure 11882-1, Outside Areas Round Sheets, did not
pumps and did not implement provisions for positioning and aligning
                                                                                                            provide for a general inspection of the north Main Steam and
the turbine driven AFW pump overspeed test switch (HS-15130) and
                                                                                                            Feedwater valve room, the motor driven pump A pump room or the
speed control potentiometer.
                                                                                                            turbine driven pump pump room. Also there are no items to check for
During a walkdown of the AFW system,
                                                                                                            adequate pump gland seal leakage and adequate gland seal leakage
the inspectors noted that the turbine driven pump gland seal leakage
                                                                                                            drainage from the gland seal leakage reservoir. The inspector
was approximately 3 to 5 times greater than that of the motor driven
                                                                                                            verified that all of the issues had been satisfactorily addressed by
pumps and appeared to be excessive.
                                                                                                            the licensee except one. Gland seal leakage from the turbine driven
The licensee acknowledged the
                                                                                                            AFW purrp has not been dispositioned yet.     IFI 424/86-117-33 remains
concern.
                                                                                                            open to follow the corrective action on the gland seal leakage.
Procedure 11882-1, Outside Areas Round Sheets, did not
                                                                                                            Paragraph 6.b.10.       Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in CS system procedure
provide for a general inspection of the north Main Steam and
                                                                                                            13115-1 which addresses TS limits did not include Mode 4 in the
Feedwater valve room, the motor driven pump A pump room or the
                                                                                                            applicable modes as required by TSs.       The inspector verified that
turbine driven pump pump room.
                                                                                                            the procedure had been revised.           This portion of IFI
Also there are no items to check for
                                                                                                            424/86-117-33 is closed.
adequate pump gland seal leakage and adequate gland seal leakage
                                                                                                            Paragraph 6.b.11. Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in procedure 13120-1 did
drainage from the gland seal leakage reservoir.
                                                                                                            not list the applicable TS modes. The inspector verified that the
The inspector
                                                                                                            procedure was revised. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.
verified that all of the issues had been satisfactorily addressed by
                                                                                                            Paragraph 6.c.     The concern involved limiting excessive overtime
the licensee except one.
                                                                                                            for personnel performing safety related functions. Limiting exces-
Gland seal leakage from the turbine driven
                                                                                                            sive overtime is addressed by TMI Action Item I.A.1.3. Procedure                                   l
AFW purrp has not been dispositioned yet.
                                                                                                            00005-C, Rev. 2, Overtime Authorization, now includes the requirement                             I
IFI 424/86-117-33 remains
                                                                                                            of TS 6.2.2.e that overtime should not be routinely scheduled for                                 l
open to follow the corrective action on the gland seal leakage.
                                                                                                            personnel responsible for performing safety-related functions.
Paragraph 6.b.10.
                                                                                                            Procedure 10000-C, which applies to Operations personnel, also
Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in CS system procedure
                                                                                                            had been revised to state that overtime should not be routinely
13115-1 which addresses TS limits did not include Mode 4 in the
                                                                                                            scheduled. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.                                           l
applicable modes as required by TSs.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                l
The inspector verified that
                                                                                                                                                                                                                <
the procedure had been revised.
w ____ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _                                                                      _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
This portion of IFI
424/86-117-33 is closed.
Paragraph 6.b.11.
Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in procedure 13120-1 did
not list the applicable TS modes.
The inspector verified that the
procedure was revised. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.
Paragraph 6.c.
The concern involved limiting excessive overtime
for personnel performing safety related functions.
Limiting exces-
sive overtime is addressed by TMI Action Item I.A.1.3.
Procedure
l
00005-C, Rev. 2, Overtime Authorization, now includes the requirement
I
of TS 6.2.2.e that overtime should not be routinely scheduled for
l
personnel responsible for performing safety-related functions.
Procedure 10000-C, which applies to Operations personnel, also
had been revised to state that overtime should not be routinely
scheduled.
This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.
l
l
<
w
.
.
.


                                                                            .
r
r            ._
._
                                    38
.
  ii. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-02. Acceptance Criteria
38
      Reviews. The IFI involved the review of the licensee's procedures
ii.
      to assure that adequate administrative controls exist for review of
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-02.
      acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance criteria
Acceptance Criteria
      are met. This item is discussed in paragraph 7.a.8 of this report.
Reviews.
  jj. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-03. Implementation of
The IFI involved the review of the licensee's procedures
      Controls to Assure Adequate MW0s and Assignment of Appropriate
to assure that adequate administrative controls exist for review of
      Functional Testing. The inspector had determined that a MWO did
acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance criteria
      not designate the functional testing to be performed. In addition,
are met. This item is discussed in paragraph 7.a.8 of this report.
      the inspector noted that QA audits indicated recurring problems in
jj.
      the adequacy of MWO instructions and designation of functional tests.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-03.
      The inspector reviewed the corrective action taken by the licensee.
Implementation of
      This review is described in paragraph 8.c. of this report.       IFI
Controls to Assure Adequate MW0s and Assignment of Appropriate
      424/87-01-03 is closed.
Functional Testing.
  kk. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-04.   Resolution of Concerns
The inspector had determined that a MWO did
      on the Seismic and Environmental Qualification (EQ) of Radiation
not designate the functional testing to be performed.
      Monitors. This IFI is discussed in paragraph 7.b.1 of this report.
In addition,
  11. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-05. Review of Temporary
the inspector noted that QA audits indicated recurring problems in
      Modifications. This IFI is closed as discussed in paragraph 9. The
the adequacy of MWO instructions and designation of functional tests.
      IFI number will remain assigned to allow tracking of the item.
The inspector reviewed the corrective action taken by the licensee.
  mm. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-06. Miscellaneous Findings
This review is described in paragraph 8.c. of this report.
      on Surveillance and Maintenance Procedure Implementation. The
IFI
      concerns, which are discussed in paragraph 7.b.3 of this report
424/87-01-03 is closed.
      included equipment mislabeling and an inadequate lighting safety
kk.
      concern.   The items were determined to be isolated cases and have
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-04.
      been corrected by the licensee. After obtaining additional informa-
Resolution of Concerns
      tion from the licensee, the fire doors and a wire radius bend concern
on the Seismic and Environmental Qualification (EQ) of Radiation
      were determined not to be issues. Therefore, with the exception of
Monitors. This IFI is discussed in paragraph 7.b.1 of this report.
      one item, discussed in paragraph 7.b.3, IFI 424/87-01-06 is closed,
11.
  nn. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-07.       Reference of
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-05.
      Nonexistent Setpoint Document in Control Room ARP's. Control Room
Review of Temporary
      ARP's were found to reference a Master Setpoint Document that was
Modifications.
      used in lieu of giving the actual setpoint.     No one in either the
This IFI is closed as discussed in paragraph 9.
      Control Room or the operations department could produce or describe
The
      the document.   The licensee provided revised procedures for the
IFI number will remain assigned to allow tracking of the item.
      following ARPs that had previously been noted as deficient.       The
mm.
      procedures no longer referenced the Master Setpoint Document. The
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-06.
      procedures reviewed were 17001-1, Rev. 5; 17013-1, Rev. 3; 17014-1,
Miscellaneous Findings
      Rev. 3; 17015-1, Rev. 2; 17016-1, Rev. 2; 17017-1, Rev.1; and,
on Surveillance and Maintenance Procedure Implementation.
      17020-1, Rev. 3. The inspector found that the revised procedures
The
      were incorporated into the control room copies.     The inspector
concerns, which are discussed in paragraph 7.b.3 of this report
      determined that the ARP's in the control room no longer referenced
included equipment mislabeling and an inadequate lighting safety
      the document. IFI 424/87-01-07 is considered closed.
concern.
  oo. (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10. Shift Relief and
The items were determined to be isolated cases and have
      Turnover. The item is discussed in paragraph 10.b.
been corrected by the licensee. After obtaining additional informa-
tion from the licensee, the fire doors and a wire radius bend concern
were determined not to be issues.
Therefore, with the exception of
one item, discussed in paragraph 7.b.3, IFI 424/87-01-06 is closed,
nn.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-07.
Reference of
Nonexistent Setpoint Document in Control Room ARP's.
Control Room
ARP's were found to reference a Master Setpoint Document that was
used in lieu of giving the actual setpoint.
No one in either the
Control Room or the operations department could produce or describe
the document.
The licensee provided revised procedures for the
following ARPs that had previously been noted as deficient.
The
procedures no longer referenced the Master Setpoint Document.
The
procedures reviewed were 17001-1, Rev. 5; 17013-1, Rev. 3; 17014-1,
Rev. 3; 17015-1, Rev. 2; 17016-1, Rev. 2; 17017-1, Rev.1; and,
17020-1, Rev. 3.
The inspector found that the revised procedures
were incorporated into the control room copies.
The inspector
determined that the ARP's in the control room no longer referenced
the document.
IFI 424/87-01-07 is considered closed.
oo.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10.
Shift Relief and
Turnover. The item is discussed in paragraph 10.b.
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 15:57, 23 May 2025

Insp Rept 50-424/87-01 on 870105-09 & 12-16.Violations Noted:Failure to Follow Procedure 00404 C by Signing Surveillance Task Sheets for Class 1E 18-month Battery Insp & Maint Indicating Acceptance Criteria Met
ML20209E044
Person / Time
Site: Vogtle Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 04/11/1987
From: Shymlock M, Linda Watson
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20209E018 List:
References
TASK-1.C.2, TASK-TM 50-424-87-01, 50-424-87-1, IEIN-86-061, IEIN-86-61, NUDOCS 8704290419
Download: ML20209E044 (39)


See also: IR 05000424/1987001

Text

.

p2 Ric

UNITED STATES

oq'o

/

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

2

~

g

o

REGloN il

5

$

101 M ARIETTA STREET N.W., SUITE 2900

8

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323

o

s,

/

.....

Report No.:

50-424/87-01

Licensee: Georgia Power Company

P. O. Box 4545

Atlanta, GA 30302

Docket No.: 50-424

License No.: NPF-61

Facility Name: Vogtle 1

Inspection Conducted: January 5 - 9 and January 12 - 16, 1987

Inspector:

h OM

'/!87

L. J./ Watson, Team Leader

Dath Signed

Team Members:

B. R. Bonser

M. S. Lesser

A. R. Long

P. B. Moore

G. Nejfelt

l

T. J. O'Connor

W. K. Poertner

'

M. B. Shymlock

C. L. Vanderneit

Approved By:

WO

M8,887

M. B. ShymlocY, Chief

Date Signed

Operational Programs Section

Division of Reactor Safety

SUMMARY

Scope:

This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of

surveillance program administrative controls and implementation, maintenance

program administrative controls and implementation, Technical Specifications

applicability to as-built systems, control room activities and plant

procedures.

Corrective action for findings described in NRC Inspection

Reports 424/85-36, 424/86-60 and 424/86-117 were reviewed.

Results:

One violation was identified involving four examples of failure to

follow procedures. No deviations were identified.

8704290419 870417

PDR

ADOCK 05000424

O

PDR

. - - - .

-

.

-- _ -

- ._

-.

..

. - .

-.

..

..

_

_.

_.

-

l

4

!

REPORT DETAILS

1.

Persons Contacted

Licensee Employees

    • P. D. Rice, Vice President, Project Engineering
    • G. B. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager, Nuclear Operations

'

    • T. Greene, Plant Manager
    • E. M. Dannemiller II, Technical Assistant to General Manager, Nuclear

Operations

    • C. E. Belflower, QA Site Manager
    • M. A. Griffis, Maintenance Superintendent
    • J. F. D'Amico, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance
    • W. C. Gabbard, Senior Regulatory Specialist
  • C. E. Felton, Vogtle Coordinator, Nuclear Operations
  • L. F. Ray, Shift Supervisor
  • P. D. Rushton, Plant Training and Emergency Planning Manager
    • W. E. Burns, Nuclear Licensing Manager
    • R. M. Bellamy, Plant Support Manager
  • T. A. Seitz, Corporate Nuclear Office of Quality Assurance
  • J. E. Swartzwelder, Deputy Manager, Operations
    • H. A. Jaynes, Maintenance Engineering Supervisor
  • A. L. Mosbaugh, Assistant Plant Support Manager
  • M. L. Hobbs, Instrument and Controls Superintendent
  • R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President and Project Director

,

  • J. A. Edwards, Senior Regulatory Specialist

'

    • W. F. Kitchens, Manager, Operations
  1. L. Russell, Operations Procedure Coordinator

d*C. F. Meyer, Superintendent, Operations

fA. Caudill, Superintendent, Operations

,

  1. H. Varnadoe, Plant Engineering Supervisor

i

Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians,

4

operators, mechanics, and of fice personnel.

!

NRC Resident Inspectors

  • J. F. Rogge
  • R. J. Schepens

+*H. Livermore

,

j

  • Attended exit interview on January 9, 1987
  1. Attended exit interview on January 16, 1987

i

i

!

. . _ _ ,

_ _ , _ _ _ . , - , . . . _ _

.

.

..

_ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - . _ __ _ , _ - _ . . , . . _ _ _ , ,

J

2

2.

Exit Interview

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 9 and 16,

1987 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.

The

inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the

inspection findings listed below.

No dissenting comments were

received from the licensee.

IFI Number

Status

Description / Reference Paragraph

424/87-01-01

Open

VIOLATION - Failure to follow procedure for

1) confirmation of test results for vital battery

surveillance (paragraph 7.a.1), 2) QA hold point

review and Shift Supervisor approval to work MWO

(paragraph 7.b.1), 3) verification by maintenance

technicians that drawings and vendor manuals were

current revisions (paragraph 8.a), 4) review and

initialing operations logs (paragraph 10.b)

424/87-01-02

Open

IFI - Review of provisions for determining that

acceptance criteria are met (paragraphs 7.a.8

and 12.11)

424/87-01-03

Closed

IFI - Followup on adequacy of functional tests

and work instructions for maintenance (paragraphs

8.c and 12.jj)

424/87-01-04

Open

IFI - Completion of QA review of DR on mounting

of radiation monitors (paragraphs 7.b.1 and

12.kk)

424/87-01-05

Closed

IFI - Determination if temporary modifications

negated surveillance tests completed after

preoperational tests (paragraphs 9 and 12.11)

424/87-01-06

Open

IFI - Miscellaneous Findings on Surveillance and

Maintenance Program Review (paragraphs 7.b.3 and

12.mm)

424/87-01-07

Closed

IFI - Use of Master Setpoint Document (paragraphs

12.nand12.nn)

424/86-117-01 Closed

IFI - Administrative controls for independent

verification of the restoration and testing of

plant equipment did not conform to the guidance

of NRC IE Notice 84-51 (paragraph 12.c)

424/86-117-02 Closed

IFI - Venting followup items including high point

vents on AFW and procedure revisions for system

venting (paragraph 12.d)

- -

-

.

-

-- _

.

.

3

424/86-117-03 Closed

IFI - Procedure revisions to include adequate

subcooling margin requirements (paragraph 12.e)

424/86-117-04 Closed

IFI - Correction of valve identification and

-

i

system lineup discrepancies (paragraph 12.f)

424/86-117-05 Closed

IFI - Correction of technical concerns in Unit

Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.g)

424/86-117-07 Open

IFI - Correction of discrepancies on labeling

of valves and equipment (paragraph 12.h)

424/86-117-09 Open

IFI - Correction of discrepancies in RVLIS

surveillance procedure and followup on vendor

recommendations (paragraph 12.1)

424/86-117-10 Closed

IFI - Procedure revision to include check of

i

equipment actuation on Control Room ventilation

start (paragraph 12.j)

424/86-117-11 Closed

IFI - Procedure prerequisites are general and not

well understood by operators (paragraph 12.k)

Clarification of cleanliness levels

424/86-117-12 Closed

IFI

-

(paragraph 12.1)

424/86-117-13 Closed

IFI - Review of events covered by Abnormal

Operating Procedures (paragraph 12.m)

424/86-117-14 Closed

IFI - Licensee to review annunciator response

j

procedures for technical adequacy, walkdown

ARPs and revise ARPs involving annunciators

on the main control board, as appropriate,

,

prior to fuel load.

Remaining ARPs to be

reviewed within 90 days (paragraph 12.n)

!

424/86-117-15 Closed

IFI - Resolution of ISI test data for CCW pump

(paragraph 12.0)

,

424/86-117-16 Closed

IFI - Resolution of acceptance criteria for

RHR differential pressure on recirc flow

(paragraph 12.p)

424/86-117-17 Closed

IFI - Resolution of water hammer in NSCW ESF

chillers (paragraph 12.q)

424/86-117-18 Closed

IFI - Review of implementation of the surveil-

lance program administrative controls and

tracking system (paragraph 12.r)

,

l

. _ . - . , - .

. .

. - - -

.

,-

. - - - .

-

_ . -

- . _

- , . . _ _ ,

.

. . . , ,

.

. _ = = _ .

.

4

4

424/86-117-19 Closed

IFI - Review of test control and configura-

tion

control

for surveillances

performed

prior to release to the Operations Department

(paragraph 12.s)

424/86-117-20 Closed

IFI - Revise procedures to clarify use of

Staggered Test Basis for determining frequency

of test (paragraph 12.t)

424/86-117-21 Closed

IFI - Review of the justification for the use

of pre-operational tests to meet surveillance

test requirements (paragraph 12.u)

424/86-117-22 Closed

IFI - Corrective action to assure control of

twelve hour surveillances (paragraph 12.v)

4

424/86-117-23 Open

IFI - Resolution of various technical issues

in regard to surveillance procedure adequacy

(paragraph 12.w)

424/86-117-24 Closed

IFI - Licensee to implement operational phase

corrective and preventive maintenance program

(paragraph 12.x)

424/86-117-25 Closed

IFI - Resolution of Technical Specification

3/4.7.5 wording in reg (ard to availability of

the Ultimate Heat Sink paragraph 12.y)

424/86-117-26 Closed

IFI - Corrective action for locking or system

lineup verification of boron injection flowpath

valves (paragraph 12.z)

<

'

424/86-117-27 Open

IFI - Followup on surveillance procedures

which have not been identified as complete

on the Technical Specification / procedure

,

i

cross reference tracking list and review of

completed

cross

reference

tracking

list

-

(paragraph 12.aa)

424/86-117-28 Closed

IFI - Procedure revision for consistent defini-

tion of surveillance test completion date and

time (paragraph 12.cc)

424/86-117-29 Closed

IFI - Review of implementation of special

triggering mechanisms to assure completion of

special

condition surveillances

(paragraph

12.dd)

l

424/86-117-30 Closed

IFI - Controls on location of BOP operator

(paragraph 12.ee)

-

_

.

. .

.

._

_ __

. . .

_.

.

.

_

___

-

_

.

. - _

5

424/86-117-31 Open

IFI - Verification of key control and access

to plant equipment by operations staff (para-

graph 12.ff)

424/86-117-32 Closed

IFI - Revise TS and procedure for 18 month check

of reactor trip breaker UV and shunt coil trip

(paragraph 12 99)

424/86-117-33 Open

IFI - Resolution of miscellaneous technical

concerns on operating procedures (paragraph

12.hh)

424/86-60-10

Closed

IFI - Adequacy of shift turnover procedures

(paragraphs 10.b and 12.00)

424/86-96-05

Closed

IFI - Review of completed surveillance procedures

(paragraph 12.bb)

TMI It e T.C.2 Closed

Shift Relief and Turnover (paragraphs 6 and 10.b)

Although proprietary material was reviewed during the inspection, no

proprietary material is contained in this report.

3.

Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters

This subject was not addressed in the inspection.

]

4.

Unresolved Items

No unresolved items were identified during the inspection.

5.

List of Abbreviations

i

ACCW(S)

Auxiliary Component Cooling Water System

AFW

Auxiliary Feedwater System

A0P

Abnormal Operating Procedure

ARP

Annunciator Response Procedure

BIT

Boron Injection Tank

B0P

Balance of Plant

CBCS

Containment Building Cooling System

CCP

Centrifugal Charging Pump

CCW(S)

Component Cooling Water System

CSS

Containment Spray System

CVCS

Chemical and Volume Control System

DR

Deficiency Report

i'

ECCS

Emergency Core Cooling System (s)

EDG

Emergency Diesel Generators

E0P

Emergency Operating Procedure

EQ

Environmental Qualification

EQDP

Environmental Qualification Data Package

ESF

Engineered Safety Feature

i

l

4

n,~,

. - -

. - - , - , - - - - - - , , - - - ,

,

_

, , - . . , , _ ,

. ,, , . , , - , , - .

,,-_-,-.g-

,-..,,,,-,-,,,,--,.m.-m--g.

, , , , - ,,

..

-

_

-

.-_

_

-

_.

_

- . . _

i

j

6

F

Degrees Fahrenheit

FSAR

Final Safety Analysis Report

HFAS

High Flux at Shutdown

HVAC

Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning

HX

Heat Exchanger

IEN

NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Notice

IFI

Inspector Followup Item

IST

Inservice Test

LP

Lineup Procedure

MDAFW(P) Motor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)

MLB

Monitor Light Board

M0V

Motor Operated Valve

MSIV

Main Steam Isolation Valve

MWO

Maintenance Work Order

MWPG

Maintenance Work Planning Group

NLO

Non-Licensed Operator

NPMIS

Nuclear Plant Maintenance Information System

NRC

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSAC

Nuclear Safety and Compliance Section

NSCW

Nuclear Service Cooling Water System

P&ID

Piping and Instrumentation Diagram

PORV

Power Operated Relief Valve

PRZR

Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer

QA

Quality Assurance

RCS

Reactor Coolant System

RER

Request for Engineering Evaluation

RHR

Residual Heat Removal System

R0

Reactor Operator

RVLIS

Reactor Vessel Level Indication System

RWST

Refueling Water Storage Tank

SI

Safety Injection

SIS

Safety Injection System

SG

Steam Generator

S0P

System Operating Procedure

SS

Shift Supervisor

SSMP

System Status Monitoring Panel

STS

Standard Technical. Specifications

TCP

Temporary Change to Procedure

TDAFW(P) Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)

TS

Technical Specification

UOP

Unit Operating Procedure

VCT

Volume Control Tank

6.

Review of TMI Items (TI 2515/65)

(Closed) TMI Item I.C.2.

Shift Relief and Turnover.

The inspector

,

reviewed the implementation of the requirements of TMI Item I.C.2 and

i

determined that the licensee had completed the actions necessary to meet

these requirements.

This review is documented fi paragraph 10.b of this

i

report. TMI Item I.C.2 is closed.

,

7

7.

Surveillance Program and Procedure Review (42450B)

During the inspection ending December 12, 1986, the inspectors had

determined that the licensee had not yet fully implemented the surveil-

lance program administrative controls except on a small number of systems

which had been accepted by the Operations Department. This item had been

identified as IFI 424/86-117-18.

During this inspection, the inspectors

reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number of

additional surveillance test packages.

Although several concerns and

one example of a failure to follow procedure were identified; in general,

the results of this review indicated that the surveillance program was

adequately implemented.

The review conducted is documented below.

IFI

424/86-117-18 is closed,

a.

Review of Completed Surveillance Packages

The inspectors reviewed completed active surveillance packages.

The

surveillance reviews were performed to verify that specific controls

were established and the surveillance system was working in accord-

ance with procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.

The

inspectors reviewed the following:

-

System was readied by Operations before performance of the

surveillance.

-

Prerequisites were completed and if not completed, adequate

justification was provided for prerequisites which were

marked not applicable.

-

All procedural steps were completed or marked appropriately.

-

Acceptance criteria were met and completed surveillances

were included in the surveillance tracking system.

Data packages supported the acceptance criteria.

-

Task sheets were attached and completed in accordance with

-

procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.

Appropriate reviews were completed as required.

-

The surveillance packages reviewed were:

SURV. TASK

TITLE

COMPLETED DATE

14225-101 Operations Weekly Surveillance Logs

1/14/87

14235-102 On Site Power Distribution Operability

1/10/87

Verification

14420-101 Solid State Protection System Train A

1/01/87

(B) Operability Test

8

14420-102 Solid State Protection System Train A

1/10/87

(B) Operability Test

14423-106 Source Range NIS Analog Channel

1/14/87

Operational Test

14805-101 Residual Heat Removal Pump and Check

1/09/87

Valve Inservice Test

14811-101 Boric Acid Trant.fer Pumps and Discharge

1/08/87

Check Valves Ir. service Test

14850-102 Cold Shutdown Valve Inservice Test

1/08/87

14890-1

Diesel Generctor Operability Test

Not recorded

14895-101 ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice

9/27/86

14896-101 ECCS Check Valve Cold Shutdown Inservice

9/22/86

14980-111 Diesel Generator Operability Test

1/09/87

14980-1

Diesel Generator Test

Not recorded

(Fuel Oil Sampling for Water)

24342-1

Pressurizer Level Control F-121

Not recorded

Channel Calibration

24519-101

R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I

10/21/86

P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration

24519-103

R. C. Pressure (Wide Range) Protection I

1/07/87

P-405 ACOT and Channel Calibration

24597-1

Containment Cooling Units 5, 6,

Not recorded

7 & 8 - Condensate Detection L-17094

24626-101 Containment Vent Effluent Air Particulate

1/08/87

Monitor 1RE-2565A

24681-101 Meteorological Station 10M Wind Direction

10/30/86

Channel Calibration

24684-C

Meteorological Station 60M Wind Speed

Not recorded

Channel Calibration

24688-101 Meteorological Station 10M Ambient and

9/12/86

and 10-60M Delta Temperature Channel

Calibration

24737-101 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903

12/04/86

24737-102 Time History Accelerograph AXT-19903

12/04/86

24739-101 Peak Acceleration AXR-19910

1/02/87

24806-101 Refueling Water Storage Tank Level L-990

1/15/86

ACOT and Channel Calibration

24840-101 Containment Pressure High Transmitters

1/02/87

RTT Sensors PT-934

28210-101 Main Steam Line Safety Valve Test

4/86

thru 120

28211-101 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test

2/20/86

28211-102 RHR Suction Relief Valve Test

1/09/86

28215-101 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010A

3/04/86

28215-102 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-80108

2/27/86

28215-103 Safety Relief Valve IST 1 PSV-8010C

3/05/86

28290-101 Containment Spray Nozzle Flow Test

N/A

28711-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning

9/08/85

28711-102 Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Cleaning

9/09/85

28712-101 Diesel Fuel Oil Piping Pressure Test

3/23/84

28820-C

Battery Charger Load Test

Not recorded

l

.

.

_-

!

9

l

28905-C

Motor Operated Valve Thermal Overload

Not recorded

and Bypass 18 Month Test

28910-102 Class 1E 18 Mo. Battery Inspection

12/08/86

and Maintenance

28912-102 Class IE Quarterly Battery Inspection

1/02/87

and Maintenance

54708-101 Containment Isolation and Containment

10/14/86

Ventilation Isolation - Manual

Initiation

54820-101 Train "A" SI Pump Response Time Test

9/28/86

54822-101 Train "B" SI Pump Response Time Test

9/28/86

54825-101 Train "B" CCWP Response Time Test

9/25/86

The following items were identified during the inspection:

(1) On procedures 28910-101,102,103, and 104, Class 1E 18-Month

Battery Inspection and Maintenance, the inspector noted that

the recorded data indicated that intercell resistance on

rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers exceeded the Technical

Specification requirement of 50 X 10-6 ohms.

The Surveillance

Task Sheets (STS), which listed the TS requirement as part of

the acceptance criteria, had in each case been signed off as

meeting acceptance criteria.

The licensee was questioned about

the signoffs.

The licensee stated that the engineer had signed

off the step because the excess resistance was attributed to the

cable length between the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers.

The inspector requested the evaluation of the cable resistance

value.

The licensee stated that an evaluation had not been

performed.

Since the cable resistance had not been determined

and subtracted from the total resistance, the value of the cell

to cell resistance was not known.

Procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program, Step 4.5.4.1,

requires an independent reviewer to confirm that test results

satisfy acceptance criteria.

The reviewer signed the STS

indicating that the acceptance criteria were met.

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities

affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented

instructions, procedures, or drawings.

This requirement is

implemented by Section 17.2, Operations Quality Assurance

Program, of the FSAR.

The failure to follow procedure 00404-C

to confirm that test results met the acceptance criteria for

the rack to rack and tier to tier jumpers on the vital batteries

is identified as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.

--

. . .-

.

-

10

(2) On data sheet 2 of procedure 14423-106, Source Range NIS Analog

Channel Operational Test, performed on January 14, 1987, the

normal reading taken from the Neutron Level Drawer Meter

exceeded the upper limit values given on the data sheet.

A

note on the data sheet directs the test performer to add the

pre-test indication on meter NI-101 to the upper limit values

for specific switch positions given on the data sheet.

This

would raise the upper limit.

Nowhere on the- data sheet,

however, is the reading on NI-101 documented.

This makes the

true upper limit unclear and makes it appear the procedure is

unsatisfactory when in fact it is satisfactory.

The licensee

agreed to change the procedure to include the reading on NI-101

on the data sheets.

No violations or deviations were identified.

(3) On procedure 14423-106, the High Flux at Shutdown (HFAS) set-

point was not checked.

A note on the proceddre stated that the

i

HFAS setpoint would be set after two fuel bundles were loaded

t

in the reactor vessel.

The inspector questioned the licensee

on the triggering mechanism for establishirg the HFAS setpoint.

The licensee stated it was part of startup test procedure

  1. 1-500-01, Initial Fuel Load Test Sequence.

The inspector

verified this and had no further comments.

1

No violations or deviations were identified.

(4) On procedure 14895, ECCS Check Valve Refueling Inservice Test,

completed September 17, 1986, required flow rates which were

marked "LATER" had been changed to specific values without a

proper procedure revision.

This item had also been identified

by the licensee's QA audits and was being followed by QA.

No violations or deviations were identified.

(5) Procedure 14811, Boric Acid Transfer Pumps and Discharge Check

Valves Inservice Test, had been identified as not acceptable by

the IST group but NSAC was showing the surveillance to be

acceptable.

This item was also identified in a QA audit and

was being followed by QA.

No violations or deviations were identified.

(6) The inspector questioned the absence of dates on a number of

'

Task Sheets attached to active surveillances.

The licensee

provided verification that the problem was corrected and the

!

surveillance tracking system was working as delineated in

procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.

The inspector

had no further questions.

No violations or deviations were identified.

l

.-

-

.

._ --

.

..

.

__ _ _

. _ _ _

11

(7) Surveillance procedure 14896-101, Revision 0,

which was

completed and reviewed by the licensee on January 12, 1987,

was not revised in accordance with the outstanding TCP, No.

14896-187-1.

The flow rate criterion on Data Sheet 1, for

the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) check valve cold

shutdown inservice test, was not changed from 3,000 gpm to

3,788 gpm, as required by this TCP nor was another TCP

written to change the flow rate criterion.

No violations or deviations were identified.

(8) The inspectors noted that items 1, 4, 5, and 7 raised questions

about the reviews required to assure that acceptance criteria

were met.

The review of the licensee's procedures to assure

that adequate administrative controls exist for review of

acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance

criteria are met is identified as inspector followup item

424/87-01-02.

No violations or deviations were identified.

b.

Field Review of Surveillance Instructions

The inspectors performed a field review of surveillance procedures

by observation of surveillances in progress or by walkdown of

procedures in the field. The following concerns were identified:

(1) The inspector observed chemistry technicians dismantling a

radiation monitor identified as 1RE-12444C.

When the inspector

asked to review the MWO under which the technicians were

performing the work, they replied that they were dismantling

the monitor via surveillance procedure 34223-C, Rev. 1, Channel

Calibration of the Gaseous Effluent Monitors.

The inspector

reviewed the procedure and associated attachments to determine

if the procedure was being followed properly.

The inspector

determined that the technicians had not obtained the signature

of the shift supervisor prior to performing work or the

signature for review of QC holdpoints.

The inspector noted that, step 5.1 of procedure 34223-C,

Prerequisites, states, " Ensure a Quality Control (QC) represent-

ative has signed the checklist indicating a QC review of the

procedure for hold points.

If hold points are indicated, notify

QC prior to starting." Additionally, step 5.2 states, " Notify

the Operations Shift Supervisor, or his designee, of the work

to be performed and obtain his signature authorization."

Neither of these signatures had been obtained.

When the lead

technician was questioned on these steps, the technician stated

that verbal approval had been obtained from the Shift Supervisor

to perform the work.

-

.

12

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires, in part, that

activities affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with

documented procedures.

VEGP FSAR, section 17.2, Operations

Quality Assurance Program, also requires that activities

affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented

procedures.

The activities described above were not accom-

plished in accordance with procedure 34223-C in that the

signature of a QC representative had not been obtained for the

hold point review, indicating that the review was not accom-

plished, and the signature of the Shift Supervisor had not been

obtained to authorize performance of the work.

The inspector

later verified that the Shift Supervisor had provided verbal

approval.

The failure to follow procedure 34223-C is identified

as an example of violation 424/87-01-01.

During the review, the inspector questioned whether or not the

radiation monitor was seismically and/or environmentally quali-

fied equipment and if provisions existed in the procedure to

maintain these qualifications.

The inspector determined that

Vogtle administrative procedure 00350-C, required that work

performed on seismically or environmentally qualified equipment

be done under the control of an MWO.

The inspector questioned

the use of surveillance procedures to control removal and

restoration of seismic and/or environmentally qualified

equipment.

Resolution of this issue was identified as

IFI 424/87-01-04.

During subsequent inspections, the inspector was informed by

the licensee that radiation monitor 1RE-12444C was seismically

qualified and the technicians were not taking any special

precautions to maintain the equipment qualification.

The

licensee generated Deficiency Reports (DRs) 1-87-0203, on the

disassembly of monitor RE-12444-C; and,1-82-0204, on detector

removal and reinstallation for monitors RE-0020A and RE-00208.

A Request for Engineering Review (RER) was written for problem

resolution and MW0s were written to cover the remaining work.

Regarding the concern of whether or not the EQ of the monitors

was compromised by the routine disassembly and reassembly, the

inspector reviewed the system description 9002-DRMS-002 to

ascertain what is required to maintain EQ. The system descrip-

tion indicates that no specific removal or replacement proce-

dures are required.

Nomal safety precautions and general shop

techniques were adequate for this task.

The portion of the

monitor that could degrade the EQ of the monitor is never

opened for these routine calibrations.

Since these calibration

activitics do not directly affect the seismically sensitive

areas of the equipment, the original procedure was not clearly

in violation of administrative procedure 00350-C, which requires

MW0s to be written for work performed on seismic or environ-

mentally qualified instrumentation.

However, the licensee

i

.

13

,

stated that all procedures that affect radiation monitors that

have seismic and/or environmental concerns are being reviewed

and revised as deemed appropriate.

Procedure 39350-C, Initial Calibration of Gaseous Process

Monitors, was written to require an MWO for the removal or

reinstallation of any components on radiation monitor RE-2562.

This system is seismically qualified per FSAR Table 11.5.2-1.

Other calibration procedures will be revised similarly in the

near future to cover all of the monitors in this table.

The

inspector was concerned that simply placing this caution in the

calibration procedure would not guarantee that a technician

would not start with the procedure for the removal of the

detector; then use the procedure for the calibration and find

out that an MWO was required to implement precautions so as not

to jeopardize the EQ of the equipment.

The inspector then reviewed the licensees EQ program in order to

determine whether or not it provided adequate assurance that EQ

is maintained.

The inspector interviewed personnel from the

Maintenance and Engineering departments as well as the Work

Planning Group.

The EQ program is implemented under procedure

20009-C, Rev.

1.

The inspector found the procedure to be

satisfactory.

Any equipment that must be EQ had an associated

package of information called the Environmental Qualification

Data Package (EQDP).

These EQDP's were numbered and controlled

documents. Each package was divided into nine parts. The parts

'

are:

(a) EQDP equipment identification list

(b) Environmental summary sheet

(c) NUREG 0588 Checklist

(d) Master listing - seismic

(e) Seismic qualification and recorder data sheets

(f) Calculations

(g) Maintenance / replacement information

(h) EQ design change signoff form

(1) Miscellaneous information

The inspector reviewed four EQDP's: Relief Valves; Radiation

Monitors; Limitorque Valves; and Rosemount Transmitters.

The

inspector determined that the packages were comprehensive and

found the information easily accessible.

.

.

_

14

The inspector reviewed three procedures to determine if the EQDP

information had been implemented into these procedures.

These

procedures were: 22402-C, Rosemount Transmitter Removal and

Reinstallation; 28211-C, Relief Valve Test Procedure; and

'

25240-C, General Bolted Flange Torquing Procedure.

All of

these procedures compared favorably with their respective EQDP.

The inspector reviewed the licensee's Nuclear Plant Maintenance

Information System (NPMIS) to observe how EQ equipment was

flagged to prevent compromise of the EQ requirements.

All

equipment had a safety classification that was reviewed whenever

an MWO was written against the equipment.

In accordance with

Regulatory Guide 1.60, Design Response Spectra for Seismic

Design of Nuclear Power Plants, the licensee uses a project

classification matrix (Table C13-1 from the VEGP Project

Reference Manual) that delineates what safety classification

code is used to designate safety related equipment and whether

the equipment is EQ or not. All of the equipment with a safety

classification that indicates either seismic or environmental

qualification must be reviewed by QC.

In addition, the Work

Planning Group engineer and the Environmental Qualification

Group engineer must both sign off on any EQ equipment that

all proper reviews have been performed, the EQDP had been

referenced, and the installation / replacement documents are

accepta,ble.

Finally, the inspector reviewed constructica documents to

determine if the equipment had been installed correctly.

The

most important aspect of the seismic qualification of the

radiation monitors is the

e, led upon which they are mounted

during normal operation.

All seismic modeling of the equipment

was performed assuming that the sled was instaited the way that

it was designed. The inspu, tor found that probNms had occurred

with the installation of the sled.

These are detailed in

Readiness Review finding M-13.

Correspondence from F. B. Marsh

of Bechtel Western Power Division to J. A. Bailey of Southern

Company Services discussed the specifics and stated that the

deficiency was not reportable under the rules of 10CFR 50.55(e).

A Deviation Report (DR) CD-9158 was generated on December 19,

1987 to address and disposition the discrepant condition.

The

DR, which details the evaluation that determined the condition

was ratisfactory, appeared adequate to the inspector.

The DR

had not been sent to QC for approval.

Overall, the inspector found the licensee's EQ program to be

satisfactory and in some aspects, exemplary.

IFI 424/87-01-03

will remain open pending review of the revisions of all radia-

tion monitor procedures that affect those monitors listed in

FSAR Table 11.5.2-1, and the closing out of CD-9158.

,

__

_

_

e

-

.- ,

-

.

,

_ _ . .

-r.

_ , , -

15

(2) Sections of procedure 24519-1, Rev. 2, Reactor Coolant Pressure

(Wide Range) Protection I 1P-405 Analog Channel Operational

Test and Channel Calibration, which apply to the analog channel

operational test using the manual system, were observed.

The

operational test failed.

As-found readings fell outside the

expected band.

Section 4.20, Summing Amplifier Card Field

Calibration, of procedure 23300-C, Rev.1, Field Calibration

Procedure, was performed and the appropriate sections of

procedure 24519-1 were repeated.

No violations or deviations were identified.

(3) An inspection of portions of the field performance of procedure

24634-1, CR Air Intake Process Radio Gas Monitor Analog Channel

Operational Test & Channel Calibration, and procedure 24623-1,

Containment Low Range Area Monitor Analog Channel Operation Test

and Channel Calibration, was performed.

The inspector had no

comments.

The inspector reviewed procedure 24183-1, Rev.1 Fuel Handling

Building Effluent Radiogas Monitor, ARX-2533.

The inspector

noted an inconsistency betwcen the procedure and panel in that

labeling for a connector was IAJ3 versus J3 on the panel.

An

LED which was unmarked on the remote / control box, did not light

as indicated by the procedure.

No LED was provided on unit

IRT-1005 as indicated in step 4.1.3.6.b.

The inspector reviewed procedure 24756-1, Rev.

2, Steam

Generator Level (Narrow Range) Protection Channel II, IL-553.

The inspector noted that the location of equipment was

determined using an out of date drawing due to the time required

to pull new drawings.

After this walkdown, the inspector encouraged the licensee to

evaluate the distribution of drawings from Document Control.

Requests for drawings by the inspector to the technicians, who

were performing work in the plant, typically resulted in a

50-minute wait in Document Control. The inspector was concerned

that the opportunity to use obsolete information would be more

likely if the people who needed the information consistently

found obtaining new drawings difficult. Prompt distribution can

greatly enhance compliance with drawing and document control

requirements. During two surveillances, which were witnessed by

,

the inspector, technicians spent approximately 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> to find

I

equipment that was either erroneously listed in the procedure

(e.g., local indication for radiation area monitor) or moved in

a modification (e.g., a steam generator level transmitter). The

inspector asked the technicians in both instances, after a

'

twenty-minute search, if it would be more expedient to check

the drawings.

In both cases, the technicians thought the

equipment would be located any moment and the time spent to

obtain a drawing was unnecessary.

16

.

i

The inspector reviewed procedure 24634-1, Rer.1, Control Room

'

i

Air Intake (1RE-12116) Process Radio Gas Monitor.

During the

surveillance, remote control test box was removed.

This item

was identified to the licensee as part of IFI 424/87-01-06.

The equipment was later determined to be used only for testing

,1

and did not affect the operation of the safety related monitor;

however, the Readout Control Box (RCB) was removed and used to

'

perform calibrations on other monitors without any tracking,

i.e., no MWO was issued. Deficiency Report 1-87-161 was written

to document this occurrence and engineering report 87-0036

was generated to perform an evaluation of the incident.

The

engineering report determined that the RCB is interchangeable on

the monitors and there is no problem with using them in this

manner.

Still, the removal of the RCB does require a MW0 and

the licensee showed the inspector a procedure that cautioned

personnel performing this action with a RCB to generate a MW0.

The procedure was a draft copy. Until the procedure is revised,

this part of IFI 424/87-01-06 will remain open.

The inspector also noted during plant walkdowns that an ambient

temperature difference of 8 to 10 existed between the Control

Building normal air conditioning room temperature gauge and the

ESF air conditioning room temperature gauge,1-1539-TIC-13150

and 1-TSH-13151.

The inspector requested the licensee to

investigate if the instruments were operable.

In a letter dated

January 12, 1987, the licensee stated that an investigation had

revealed that the instruments served separate functions,

i.e.,

monitored different rooms.

However, as a result of this

finding, the inspector later determined that the licensee had

written maintenance work order (MW0) 18700997 to correct the

discrepancy between these instruments, since both instruments

measured the same ambient room temperature. This is considered

acceptable; however, the action did not correspond to the

January 12, 1987 response.

No followup is considered necessary

for this item.

Other concerns involving emergency lighting which was out in

a stairwell, the failure of personnel to close fire doors

and a question on the wire bend radius of cable at location

A-1813-M3-027 were promptly answered or corrected by the

licensee.

The wire bend radius was determined to be within

specification.

These concerns had also been identified as

part of IFI 424/87-01-06. These concerns are considered closed.

No violaticns or deviations were identified.

1

-

.

-

- _ - -

17

8.

Maintenance Program and Procedure Review (42451B, 357438)

During previous inspections, reviews had been conducted of the administra-

tive controls for plant maintenance, the technical adequacy of maintenance

procedures and the implementation of the maintenance program. The review

included an assessment of the corrective maintenance program; an assess-

ment of the preventative maintenance program; a review of equipment

control including the removal and restoration of equipment, equipment

status tracking and functional testing requirements; verification of

control of special processes, housekeeping and system cleanliness; and,

document review and field verification of the implementation of the

maintenance program.

The program had not been fully implemented under

the operational quality assurance program at that time.

Followup on the

implementation of the program was identified as IFI 424/86-117-24.

During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed procedure 00350-C,

Maintenance Program, Rev. 5, dated December 3,1986.

This procedure

was the administrative procedure which governed maintenance activities

during operation.

Additionally, the inspectors witnessed several

maintenance activities in progress including the processing of mainte-

nance work orders (MWO) in accordance with the requirements of 00350-C.

The inspectors also reviewed completed work packages that were accom-

plished under the operational QA program.

The inspectors verified that

the licensee had implemented its planned maintenance program.

Based on

the review, IFI 424/86-117-24 is closed.

The field review consisted of observing 14 MW0s which addressed various

aspects of plant maintenance.

The inspector noted that MW0's, with one

exception, were appropriately filled out and all MW0s reviewed addressed

such areas as QC hold points and proper initial review by other depart-

ments.

The inspector noted a number of cross outs which detracted from

legibility. The inspector identified the following items:

a.

The inspector determined that maintenance personnel had not verified

that approved drawings, procedures and vendor manuals included in

MW0s in use in the field were the current revision.

Procedures

00103-C, Document Distribution and Control, and 00101-C, Drawing

Control, required that drawings, procedures and vendor manuals be

verified as current every seven days. These procedures also required

that any documents which affected the revision to be noted on the

affected working copy.

In addition, procedure 20050-C, MWPG Work

Order Processing, requires that working copy documents be verified

current prior to their issuance to the field; and, procedure 20407-C,

Maintenance Conduct of Operations, states that it is the responsi-

bility of the user to ensure that only current, approved working copy

documents are used.

The maintenance personnel observed by the

inspector had failed to perform the seven day review for drawings on

MW0s 18700429,18700453 and 18624440 and for vendor manuals on MW0

18624165.

l

i

!

--

. - .

_ _ _

_ ,_-

- - _ .

.. - .

.

._.

l'

18

10 CFR 50, Appendix B,

Criterion V,

requires that activities

affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with documented

instructions, procedures or drawings.

The failure to follow

procedures 00101-C, 00103-C and 20407-C is identified as an

example of violation 424/87-01-01.

During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspector determined that

the drawings and vendor manuals included in the MW0s reviewed were

the latest revisions. The Maintenance Department issued a memorandum

to all maintenance department supervisors and foremen requiring them

to review all work packages in their possession to assure that all

working copy documents are the latest revision.

Deficiency Report (DR) 1-87-0185 was written by the licensee to

document the finding. The licensee stated that the Quality Assurance

Department will perform random audits of the maintenance program.

Additionally, the licensee will consider incorporating into the

appropriate Maintenance Department procedure the requirement that

,

'

foremen and supervisors verify weekly that working copy documents are

the latest revision.

b.

Paragraphs 4.1.2.c through e of 00350-C, stated that MW0s were not

required for certain activities which do not involve safety-related,

seismic or environmentally qualified equipment.

The inspector

interviewed members of the Maintenance Work Planning Group concerning

the process used in making this determination and documentation of

the review.

The MWPG stated that equipment addressed by paragraphs

c, d, and e of 00350-C was contained in the Nuclear Plant Management

Information System (NPMIS) which delineates all of the pertinent

information on the safety-related, seismic and environmental qualifi-

cation classifications of equipment.

If the foreman is in doubt, an

MWO is submitted which will be reviewed for procedural applicability.

Additionally, paragraph d, which addresses labeling, was being

performed under operations procedure 10016-C, Equipment Labeling

Guidelines.

No violations or deviations were identified.

c.

The inspector noted that MW0 18624097 did not have a functional

test assigned in block 32 as required by procedure 00350-C.

During

review of other maintenance work orders the inspectors noted that

MW0s appeared weak in the area of functional testing.

This item is

of particular concern in light of the number of findings identified

by the Quality Assurance Department related to the failure to assign

functional testing to MW0s.

These findings are documented in audit

reports No. OP15/TP02-86/20, #045-II, July 12 thru August 5,1986;

No. OP15-86/45, November 17 thru December 5, 1986; and No. OP15-87/03,

January 6 thru 11,1987.

The inspectors identified this item as IFI

424/87-01-03.

i

1

-

_

,

--

-

,

. - .

.-.

- . -

- , .

- - . .

_ _ _ _

_

_ __

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

19

The inspector reviewed the corrective action for this item during

the week of January 12, 1987.

In response to the item, the licensee

had issued procedure 20051-C, Maintenance Work Order Functional

Tests, to provide guidelines for proper functional test assignments.

The licensee also plans to revise the MWO processing procedure to

assign the functional testing requirements after the work has been

accomplished.

In addition, the licensee established a review team

assigned the task of assessing the quality of the MW0s being issued

by the Maintenance Work Planning Group and returning to the MWPG

those MW0s lacking sufficient direction or adequate functional

testing.

The work conducted under MWO 18624097 was complete and

awaiting the assignment of the appropriate functional testing.

The

inspector determined that the licensee had implemented procedures

which provided adequate direction and review to ensure that MWO

instructions are sufficiently detailed and are assigned the appropri-

ate functional testing.

IFI 424/87-01-03 is closed. The IFI number

will remain assigned to the item to allow tracking of the finding.

No violations or deviations were identified.

9.

Review of Aaministrative Controls for Temporary Modifications (424518)

During the inspection, the inspector noted that there were numerous

temporary modifications installed in the plant. The inspectors determined

that the licensee had a mechanism to review temporary modifications and

their effect on system operability once the system was formally turned

over to operations. However, the licensee was performing surveillances on

systems that had temporary modifications installed.

Therefore, the

validity of the surveillance could be affected for surveillance tests

completed after preoperational testing and prior to establishing configu-

ration control by Operations.

This concern was identified as Inspector

Followup Item 424/87-01-05.

During the week of January 12, 1987, the inspection team conducted a

review of the licensee's procedures.

Procedure 00350-C, Maintenance

Program, addressed the removal of temporary modifications to ensure

that proper documentation was provided and that the functional testing,

including assessment of its impact on surveillances, was performed.

Procedure 00307-C, Temporary Modifications, addressed the methods utilized

to ensure that temporary modifications are properly identified, docu-

mented, controlled and evaluated.

,

While under the jurisdiction of the Start Up Manual, Procedures SUM-10,

Temporary Modification Control, and SUM-22, Maintenance Work Orders,

adequately addressed the subject of temporary modifications including the

,

assessment of its impact on surveillance tests.

'

.-

_ --

.

_ _ - - . . . - - -

. . .

-

__

_ _.

__

.

20

The aforementioned maintenance and temporary modification procedures

ensure that work / temporary modifications performed on a system will verify

that surveillances are active and document that components / systems are

functioning properly and capable of performing their intended safety

function.

Temporary modifications which were in place during pre-

operational testing which was utilized to satisfy surveillance require-

ments were adequately addressed by the constraints imposed by Section 4.4

of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test Program.

Under the pre-

operational test program, the test supervisor was responsible for

reviewing the temporary modification log for items which may preclude

completion of the test or invalidate the test results upon completion.

Specifically, paragraph 4.4.6.1 required that " documentation for the

completed procedure or work activity shall be carefully reviewed to ensure

that satisfaction of the surveillance requirements is clearly documented

and that the conditions during the period of the test are the same as

would be experienced during the operational phase surveillance test

procedure.

Discrepancies shall be noted in the comments section of the

documentation check list."

As a further area of discussion, it should be noted that test / surveil-

lance procedures contain steps which require the introduction of

modifications which place the system / component into a configuration such

that the test / surveillance procedure attains the required objective. The

introduction of such modifications is reviewed with the development of the

procedure.

The inspector feels that all concerns regarding temporary

modifications have been addressed and therefore inspector followup item

424/87-01-05 is closed.

The inspector followup item number will remain

assigned to the item to allow tracking of the item.

No violations or deviations were identified.

10. Control Room Activities Review (424508)

a.

The inspector reviewed control room administrative procedures and

verified documentation maintained in the control room to assure

the documentation was being maintained in accordance with procedures.

Documents reviewed were:

Reactor Operator & Shift Supervisor Logs

LC0 Log

i

Standing Orders

Jumper & Lifted Wire Clearance Log

Operations Reading Book

Disabled Aanunciator Log

The inspector also checked 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> Technical Specification valve

position verification requirements applicable to the ECCS subsystems.

,

These verifications were being performed properly. The inspector had

no comments.

- - _ _

,

21

It was noted previously that numerous administrative controls

established for the management of those plant and control room

activities conducted under the direction of licensed operatcrs

were not implemented.

These findings were documented in NRC

Inspection Report 424/86-117.

However, during this inspection

the inspectors noted a marked improvement in this area.

The

administrative controls were implemented and review of record,

logs and checklists indicated thorough input and current status.

The inspector had no further comments in this area.

No violations or deviations were identified.

b.

(Closed)

Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10 (TMI Action Item

I.C.2).

Shift Relief and Turnover. The inspector reviewed procedure

10004-C, Shift Relief, Rev. 3, and the shift turnover process to

ensure adequate controls were in place to provide for a complete

shift turncver and the meeting of TMI action item I.C.2 requirements.

The inspector's review included observation of control room activity,

review of logkeeping and log review, and a review of all procedures

governing shift turnover.

The inspector noted that adequate controls appeared to be in place

to maintain access to the control room in an orderly manner.

The

operators also appeared to display a professional manner and surveil-

lance of the control boards appeared to be adequate.

The Reactor Operator (RO), Balance Of Plant (80P), and Non-Licensed

Operators (NLO) utilize rounds sheets to log and record plant

parameters. The inspector reviewed the rounds sheets of the R0, B0P,

and the NL0s.

These sheets appeared to be properly completed and to

adequately meet the part of TMI action item I.C.2 which requires that

the licensee provide assurance that plant parameters were within

allowable limits.

The rounds sheets of the NL0s are reviewed by the

R0, B0P, and Shift Supervisor (SS) to ensure knowledge of plant

parameters not indicated in the control room.

The rounds sheets of

the R0 and the B0P are also reviewed by the SS.

The inspector

determined that these reviews appeared to be taking place and that

the operators in the control room were cognizant of the status of the

plant.

While reviewing the narrative logs, the inspector noted on

January 15, 1987, that the SS log had no initialed review by

the day shift SS for the previous night's log entries.

When

questioned as to the apparent lack of a review, the SS told the

inspector that he did not review the previous night's logs and that

he was not required to review his own logs by procedure because

the verbal turnover from the off-going SS was adequate.

The

inspector showed the SS where procedure 10004-C, Revision 3, Shift

Relief, required the on-coming operator to review and initial the

._.

-.

- - . ,

22

narrative logs completed since the last shift worked by that operator

or for the preceding 5 days, whichever is less.

The SS stated that

he was referring to direction received from procedure 10001-C,

Revision 3, Logkeeping, however, when he showed the procedure to

the inspector he noted that he was incorrect and that he was also

required to review his narrative logs by this procedure.

The failure to review and initial the Shif t Supervisor narrative

logs is a failure to follow approved plant procedures in accordance

with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.

This item is identified as

an example of violation 424/87-01-01.

During the review of procedure 10004-C the inspector identified a

discrepancy between the procedure and the On Shift Operations

Supervisor (0505), R0, and B0P checklists.

These checklists are

provided in procedures 11870-C,11872-C, and 11869-C, respectively.

The procedures require each on-coming OSOS, R0, and 80P to review the

following logs in addition to the rounds sheets and narrative logs:

Special Conditions Surveillance Log, Clearance Log, Lif ted Wire Log,

and Temporary Modifications Log.

The OSOS, R0, and 80P checklists

were missing the appropriate check blocks for each of the above logs.

This was brought to the attention of the licensee and the checkshetts

were modified to reflect the intent of the procedure.

The TMI action item also required implementation of a system to

evaluate the effectiveness of the shift relief turnover procedure.

Step 3.12 of procedure 10004-C states that the 050S shall make an

evaluation of shift relief and turnover at least semiannually.

The

results of this evaluation were to be forwarded to the Operations

Manager for disposition.

Although the statement contained in the

licensee's procedure directed the Operations Superintendent to

perform an evaluation, the procedure provided no instructions on how

the evaluation was to be performed.

The inspector discussed this

item with the licensee and the licensee issued a revision to the

Non-Technical Specification Activities sheet.

Prior to the revision

the sheet merely restated the step in the procedure and provided no

further direction.

The revision provides direction to the OSOS by

listing several specific items to be addressed during the evaluation.

This revision appeared to satisfy the final requirement of the TMI

action item. TMI Action Item I.C.2 and IFI 424/86-60-10 are closed.

11.

Inspection and Enforcement Notice Review (92701)

The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to IE Notice 86-61,

Failure of Auxiliary Feedwater Manual Isolation Valve.

The inspector

l

discussed the notice with the licensee and determined that the preventive

maintenance requirements for manual isolation valves were determined on a

case-by-case basis during the formulation of the PM program.

Based or

this review this item is closed.

_ . - _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

23

12.

Inspector Followup Items (92701)

a.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-02.

Evaluation of

Operational Event Reports.

The IFI involved a concern that the

licensee tended to address items programmatically rather than

technically. The applicant had committed to reopen and reevaluate IE

Information Notice 85-23 and reevaluate preoperational testing

associated with differential pressure transmitters.

The inspector

reviewed a March 14, 1986 memorandum from Ron Bone, GPC to Bob Lide,

GPC which provided the technical evaluation of the preoperational and

startup testing of the differential pressure transmitters and an

evaluation of IE Information Notice 85-23.

The inspector did not

identify any concerns with the licensee's disposition of the evalua-

tion findings.

In addition, the inspector reviewed five additional

IE Information Notice evaluations and identified no concerns.

This

item is considered closed.

b.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/85-36-03.

Performance of Safety

Evaluations and Duties and Responsibilities of Plant Review Board.

The IFI concerned the lack of procedural requirements to submit

safety evaluations for unreviewed safety questions and Technical

Specification changec to the Plant Review Board for review.

The

inspector reviewed a revised copy of 00051-C, Review and Approval of

Procedures, which added this requirement. This item is closed.

c.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-01.

Independent

Verification.

The inspector reviewed procedure 00308-C and deter-

mined that the licensee had met the NRC g'aidance in regard to

independent verification.

The inspector verified that independent

verification was being performed in accordance with procedure

00308-6, Independent Verification Policy. The inspector observed the

performance of a Boric Acid Transfer Pump tag-out and checked a

co.'pleted RHR system lineup. This item is considered closed.

d.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-02.

Lack of Vents on

AFW Piping at Apparent System High Points. The inspectors had noted

in a system walkdown of the Auxiliary Feedwater System that there

were no high point vents on the AFW side of the first check valve

between the AFW system and the main feedwater bypass line for stecm

generators 1 and 4.

The inspectors were concerned that any back-

leakage and subsequent steam formation of main feedwater through

those check valves would become trapped in the highpoints and could

result in water hammer upon AFW initiation. There were no provisions

within the procedure, 13610-1, to monitor these highpoints for

1eakage and steam formation, nor to take action, upon detection of

,

steam formation, to resolve water hanner concerns.

The inspector

reviewed the analysis performed by the licensee for backleakage into

the AFW system and determined that the present design and monitoring

procedures provide adequate assurance that backleakage will not occur

or result in waterhammer in the AFW system. This item is closed.

-

1

.

-

_.

_

. - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _

24

e.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-03.

Precautions on

Maintaining Subcooling Margin.

Item a was closed in Inspection

Report 424/86-117.

In regard to Item b, which concerned A0P 18009-1,

Steam Generator Tube Leak, the inspector had determined that Step 5,

" Response Not Obtained", required the reduction of RCS temperature

from 557 F to 500 F prior to isolation of the faulted SG if the

faulted S/G was not immediately identified.

The procedure then

required the subsequent identification and isolation of the faulted

S/G and RCS depressurization to 25-50 psig greater than the faulted

S/G pressure. Under these conditions, RCS subcooling margin would be

approximately 5 F, which is substantially less than the 28 F sub-

cooling margin parameter delineated in procedure 19200-1, F-0,

Critical Safety Function Status Trees, for assuring adequate core

cooling in the Emergency Operating Procedure Network.

In addition,

no instructions were given to isolate the cold leg accumulators at

950 psig.

The inspector reviewed the revision of the procedure that had been

reviewed and approved by the Plant Review Board.

(The revision was

handwritten at the time of the review.)

Prior to the steps that

depressurized the RCS to 25-50 psig of the faulted S/G, the licensee

i

had inserted the following steps: "If pressurizer pressure lowers to

less than 1000 psi, accumulators should be isolated." and, "During

cooldown, maintain at least 50 F RCS subcooling."

These changes

adequately addressed the problems described above and Item b of IFI

424/86-117-03 is closed.

f.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-04. Correction of Valve

Identification and Lineup Discrepancies. Each item identified in IFI

424/86-117-04 is addressed separately below.

Item a.

NSCW valve 1-1202-X4-205, shown to be on the return line

l

of the train "A"

reactor cavity cooling coil, was listed on the

alignment checklist of procedure 11150-1, Rev.1, but was not on

the P&ID, nor was it found in the system during a system walkdown.

The licensee provided the inspector a Temporary Change to Procedure

(TCP) form number 11150-1-87-2, generated and approved on January 8,

1987, which corrected the checklist. The TCP required final approval

by the Plant Review Board by January 22, 1987.

Item a of IFI

424/86-117-04 is closed.

Item b.

A vent valve on the NSCW system on the outlet from the

lube oil cooler for the centrifugal charging pumps on train A was

not on the valve lineup verification list of procedure 11150-1,

Rev. O.

This discrepancy had been corrected on Rev.1 of this

procedure.

Item b of IFI 424/86-117-04 is closed.

ltem c.

This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

.

1

!

Item d.

This item was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

.-- - -, -

.

_

-

, . _ .

. - . . _

- - _ . , - -- -

- - - _ - - ,

25

Item e.

The CS system alignment procedure, 11115-1, and the CS

system P&ID, drawing 1X4DB131, did not agree.

The CS drawing

contained two valves, X-40 and X-127, on a flushing line downstream

of the B train CS pump that were not included in the alignment

procedure.

The valves were verified to exist during the CS system

walkdown.

The drawing indicated that the valves were both normally

closed.

Also, in the same flushing connection, the CS alignment

procedure showed valve U4-012 closed.

The CS P&ID showed the valve

locked open. The inspector reviewed procedure 11115-1 and determined

that the licensee had corrected the discrepancies.

Item e of IFI

424/86-117-04 is closed.

Iten f.

The IFI concerned the removal of a reference to a obsolete

controller from a procedure.

No followup review was considered

necessary.

Item g.

The inspector noted that CTB Cooling Unit Outlet Dampers

were required to be locked open per Containment Heat Removal System

drawing 1X4DB212.

Procedure 13120-1 did not include the locking

requirement and the locking method.

The inspector determined that

the licensee had corrected the discrepancy.

Item g of 424/86-117-04

is closed.

g.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-05.

Discrepancies in

Unit Operating Procedures.

Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-05

is addressed separately below.

Item a.

Item a was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

Item b.

Item b was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

Item c.

Procedure 12006-1, step 2.2.5, paraphrased a Technical

Specification requirement.

The paraphrase was incorrect.

The step

should have read "... and at least one loop in operation with the

reactor trip breakers open."

The inspectors verified that 12006-1

had been corrected.

Item c of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.

Item d.

Procedure 12006-1, Section C4.1, Preparation for Continuing

Unit Cooldown, required action be taken to accivate protection

against cold overpressurization.

Only one method of cold over-

pressure protection was addressed, the use of PORVs.

The procedure

also should have addressed the two other mear of cold overpressure

protection and a mechanism to declare which method was providing

protection.

The procedure should have addressed the implementation

of the TS :urveillance requirement on the RHR relief valves which

must be completed prior to taking credit for the RHR reliefs.

The

inspector verified that procedure 12006-1 had been changed.

Item d

of IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.

.

-

g

-

.

-.

.

.

26

Item e.

Procedure 12005-1 did not include a requirement in the

Limitations section to refer to TS 3.4.1.2.

The inspector verified

i

that procedure 12005-1 had been changed.

Item e of IFI 424/86-117-05

is closed.

Item f.

Procedure 12006-1 did not include a precaution to assure

that when the reactor is in the source range, positive reactivity

additions will only be made by one controlled method at a time.

The inspector verified that 12006-1 had been changed.

Item f of

IFI 424/86-117-05 is closed.

j

h.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-07.

Discrepancies in

Equipment Labeling.

Each item identified in IFI 424/86-117-07 is

addressed separately below.

i

Item a.

Name tags were missing from RHR valves HV-8701B and

1205-027.

The licensee stated that one of these tags had been

replaced and the other had been ordered.

These valves will be

examined during a subsequent inspection to assure that these actions

l

are taken.

Item a of IFI 424/86-117-07 is open.

l

Item b.

The inspector determined that the B train controller at

the remote shutdown panel was still labeled as 4.

Item b of IFI

424/86-117-07 remains open.

Item c.

The TDAFW panel SG level gauge was not labeled wide range or

narrow range.

The procedure did not indicate the range. An AFW to

SG bypass flow gauge was not labeled with engineering units.

The

inspector verified that the SG level gauge had been labeled.

The

bypass flow gauge had not been labeled.

Item c of IFI 424/86-117-07

remains open.

Item d.

Item d was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

Item e.

Item e was closed in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

Item f.

The inspector had noted that engineering units were not

displayed on strip chart recorder scales for main steam temperature

and other recorders.

The inspector subsequently reviewed labeling

of main control board strip chart recorders for engineering units.

Although the main steam temperature had been correctly labeled by

'

the licensee, other recorders still had no units.

Item f of IFI

1

424/86-117-07 remains open.

Item g.

The inspector noted that remote handwheels in the CVCS

system including BIT valves and charging crossover were not labeled.

The applicant stated that handwheels had been installed recently and

labeling was planned but had not been completed.

The inspector

conducted a tour of the auxiliary building levels containing the CVCS

,

system and noted a greatly improved level of labeling for the remote

.

manual valve operators, however, the inspector noted several remote

i

<

<-,--,.-----.,,,--m-

,-


.-w.,,

,-p.m,

w

w

-.----w.,-n..-,.m--

. - , ,-

-,,-,..,,--,n

,,-y

,,--,.--m-e-,-

yme

--

.

27

manual valve operators in the waste gas disposal area which lacked

tags. The licensee stated that final efforts were being completed in

assuring the adequacy of valve labeling.

No additional followup is

considered necessary.

Item g of IFI 424/86-117-07 is closed.

Item h.

The CS alignment procedure, 11115-1, lists two sets of

120V AC CS MOV space heater breakers. A check of the 120V AC breaker

panels (IAYD1 and 18YD1) identified the breakers as being labeled

<

" spares."

The applicant is determining if these breakers are

utilized for the M0V space breakers.

Item h of IFI 424/86-117-07

remains open.

i.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-09.

Review of Reactor

Vessel Level Indication System.

Four concerns were identified during

the review of RVLIS involving procedure nomenclature, instrumentation

references in procedure 14228-1, a vendor recommendation for a

control room annunciator that had not been provided, and a vendor

recommendation for periodic checks of locally indicating null meters.

The inspector was provided a Daily Schedule Control Sheet which

indicated that the null meters would be checked by Operations

quarterly.

It is noted that the RVLIS will be tested when the

reactor coolant system is at system operating pressure during startup

testing.

The inspector will review the reuining items and the

results of the RVLIS testing after startup.

IFI 424/86-117-09

remains open.

j.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-10.

Procedure Revision

to Include Check of Equipment Actuation on Control Room Ventilation

Start.

The inspector reviewed procedure 13301-1, which had been

revised in Rev.1 to include steps that verify that the outside air

supply dampers close on manual actuation of Control Room Toxic Gas

Isolation.

IFI 424/86-117-10 is closed.

k.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-11.

Adequacy of

Procedure Prerequisites.

The inspectors had identified that scme

of the prerequisites in S0Ps and surveillance procedures were too

general.

Interviews with licensee personnel indicated that it was

not clear to them what was required to be verified to satisfy

selected prerequisites.

By letter dated January 14, 1987, the

licensee committed to implement additional controls of prerequisites

until the procedures were reviewed and modified to clarify prerequi-

sites.

The licensee stated that standing order 1-87-04 had been

issued to Operations to require that prior to initial use of any

procedure being used in the control room the Shift Supervisor and

operator will review the prerequisites / initial conditions section

to ensure clarity and understanding of the required conditions. The

order contains provisions to upgrade prerequisites by submitting

comments / changes via an attachment to the letter.

Based on this

commitment, IFI 424/86-117-11 is closed.

.

.

_

-.

._.

_ _ _ _ _

28

,

f

1.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-12.

Clarification of

Cleanliness Levels.

The IFI involved clarification of the cleanli-

ness zone designations in Section 4.1.d of procedure 00254-C, Plant

'

Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control, to ensure that all open RCS

components, as well as the refueling cavity, would be classified as

Level II. The licensee revised the Level II cleanliness requirements

in 00254-C, Section 5.4, to specifically include any system that

could allow contaminates to reach the RCS.

This revision meets the

intent of the IFI and IFI 424/86-117-12 is closed,

i

!

m.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-13.

General Review

i

of Abnormal Operating Procedures.

Topics from Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978, were verified to have procedures

established.

The following contingencies were implemented by the

procedures listed below:

l

Procedure Revision

Event

Number

Number

Loss of Condenser Vacuum

- 18011-1

1

18023-1

1

Loss of Containment Integrity

- 17005-1

2

Loss of Feedwater

- 17009-1

0

18016-1

1

Conditions Requiring Emerg. Boration

- 17010-1

3

>

18007-1

1

Fuel Cladding Failure

- 17005-1

2

18006-1

1

High Activity in Coolant or Offgas

- 17100-1

2

17213-1

0

,

18009-1

2

Pressure Control Malfunction

- 18011-1

1

Plant Fires

- 17103-C

0

18038-1

2

,

i

Abnormal Releases of Radioactivity

- 18009-1

2

j

Based on this review, procedural implementation of Regulatory

'

Guide 1.33 is adequate and IFI 424/86-117-13 is closed.

n.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-14. Annunciator Response

Procedure (ARP) Discrepancies. The inspector reviewed the licensee's

commitment to conduct a review of ARP's to determine the adequacy of

initial operator actions, the accuracy of window labelling, and the

overall adequacy of each procedure.

The inspector reviewed Main

Control Board (MCB) ARP's (panels 1 through 20) and concluded that a

thorough review had been performed on these procedures and the

procedures accurately reflected the annunciator windows and provided

sufficient initial operator action.

The inspector also reviewed

several of the review packagos for the annunciator panels, particu-

,

'

larly those on the MCB. All of the reviews appeared to be comprehen-

sive and competent. Although the ARP's for the annunciators that are

(

- - .

- . - - - -

-

.

.

- -

- - - -

-

- -

.

- - -

- -

.

- . . - - - - . - . .

- -

-

.-

29

!

not on the MCB have not all been revised as yet; the reviews that

were completed were adequate and the licensee program for completion

of the reviews was determined to be adequate.

Therefore, IFI

424/86-117-14 is closed.

During the review of the corrective action for IFI 424/86-117-14,

the inspector detennined that the ARPs referenced a Master Setpoint

Document in lieu of giving an actual setpoint for certain annunciator

alarms.

Interviews with several operators indicated that they did

not know where to find this document.

In addition, personnel in the

Operations Department were not sure as to the exact form or location

of this document.

Followup on the licensee's actions to establish

the document or to replace the references to the document in the

ARP's with the actual setpoint was identified as IFI 424/87-01-07.

This IFI was subsequently reviewed during this inspection and the

inspector determined that the licensee had taken corrective action

for the IFI. This review is documented under paragraph 12.nn for IFI

424/87-01-07 in this report.

o.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-15.

Acceptability of

Baseline IST Data for Section XI ASME Pump Testing.

This item

concerned baseline data obtained on four of six Component Cooling

Water (CCW) pumps which was below the data obtained during preopera-

tional testing.

The inspector requested engineering justification

for the operability of these pumps prior to fuel load. The inspector

discussed with the licensee the ASME Section XI code, the licensee's

ISI program, the inherent error in the measuring equipment, and the

configuration of the preoperational test versus that of the ISI test.

Pump curves from the manufacturer were compared with the preopera-

tional data and the baseline data.

The licensee provided adequate

justification as to the operability of the CCW pumps in question.

IFI 424/86-117-15 is closed.

,

p.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-16. Technical Specifica-

tion on the Discharge Flow of the RHR Pump.

The inspector had

determined that the discharge pressure on the recirculation flow of

RHR pump B was equal to 180 psid. TS 4.2.5.f required the discharge

pressure to be 1180 psid. The licensee had stated that a TS revision

,

had been requested to change the value to be 1165 psid. The inspec-

tor subsequently reviewed the TS revision whIch incorporated the

change.

IFI 424/86-117-16 is closed,

-

q.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-17.

Resolution of Water

Hanner in NSCW. The item concerned the waterhammer that had occurred

on the NSCW system during the Loss of Offsite Power test.

The

licensee's analysis, which concluded that the waterhammer did not

impair the operability of the system, was reviewed and found to be

acceptable.

IFI 424/86-117-17 is closed.

.-

_

-

-

.- - - -. - -- - - -

-

. . . - -

.

.

--

30

r.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-18.

Implementation of

Surveillance Program.

During the inspection ending December 12,

1986, the inspectors had determined that the licensee had not yet

fully implemented the surveillance program administrative controls

except on a small number of systems which had been accepted by the

Operations Department.

During this inspection, the inspectors

reviewed the implementation of the surveillance program and a number

of additional surveillance test packages. Although several concerns

were identified and one example of a failure to follow procedure was

identified; in general, the results of this review indicated that the

surveillance program was adequately implemented.

The review is

documented in paragraph 7 of this report.

IFI 424/86-117-18 is

closed.

s.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-19.

Review of Test

Control and Implementation of Configuration Control during

Performance of Surveillance Testing.

The inspectors had determined

that in some surveillances performed during the preoperational

testing, the prerequisites were not always satisfied prior to

beginning the test.

It was not clear in the cases reviewed whether

or not credit would be taken for the test. The inspectors reviewed a

number of completed surveillance packages and observed additional

performances of surveillance testing.

No additional instances of

failure to satisfy prerequisites or establish system configuration

were noted.

The inspector rereviewed the performance of the MDAFW

surveillance procedure,14807, and determined that the system had

been retested.

Additional information on the review of the surveil-

lance program is provided in paragraph 7.

IFI 424/86-117-19 is

closed,

t.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-20.

Revise Procedures to

Clarify Use of Staggered Test Basis for Determining Frequency of

Test.

The inspector had determined that although the Surveillance

Test Coordinator was correctly tracking surveillances required on a

staggered test basis, the test frequencies specified in certain

surveillance procedures did not mention the requirement for stagger-

ing the tests.

The inspector determined that procedure 00404-C,

Surveillance Test Program, has been revised to include the TS

definition of staggered test basis.

The inspector reviewed the

deficient procedures identified and determined that the surveillance

procedures had been revised to specify that the tests are to be

performed on a staggered test basis where appropriate.

IFI

424/86-117-20 is closed.

u.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-21.

Review of

Justifications for Use of Preoperational Tests to Meet TS

Surveillance Requirements.

The

inspectors

reviewed the

preoperational test data used to take credit for the 18 month

surveillance tests of the emergency diesel generators (EDG) and

the battery chargers.

The inspectors reviewed the pre-op tests

with the engineers responsible for the EDGs and the battery

- _ _ .

._

_

_

_

_

, . _

. __

31

chargers.

The review included a step by step table-top walkthrough

uf the effected surveillances with a comparison of the pre-op data

used to take credit for required data in the surveillances.

In both

cases the inspectors determined that the pre-op data appeared to be a

valid substitute for the data required for the surveillance and that

the licensee did an adequate job in the justification of the use of

the pre-op data.

The inspector discussed the controls with the

licensee which will be utilized for assuring that startup tests are

appropriately evaluated if the tests are to be used in lieu of

surveillance tests.

The inspector determined that the licensee made

significant improvements in the evaluation of the use of other tests

in lieu of surveillance tests and took steps to assure that surveil-

lance tests were performed in those cases where other tests did not

satisfy the surveillance test requirements.

The inspector had no

additional questions.

IFI 424/86-117-21 is closed.

v.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-22. Corrective Action to

Assure Control of Twelve Hour Surveillances. The inspector reviewed

procedure 14000-1, Rev. 3, Operations Shift and Daily Surveillance

Logs, which now specify that surveillances be performed within

two hours of each shift.

Procedure 10000-C, Rev. 3, Conduct of

Operations, had been revised to require that the On Shift Operations

Supervisor or the Shift Supervi::or ensure that procedure 14000-1

be performed within the first two hours of each shift.

IFI

424/86-117-22 is closed.

w.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-23.

Miscellaneous

Technical Issues Identified in Review of Surveillance Program.

This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified

during the review of surveillance procedures and/or surveillance

program implementation.

Each concern is identified separately below

by the paragraph number in Inspection Report 424/86-117.

Paragraph 7.c.

Procedure 14721-1 required SI pumps to be operated

during the test; however, there was no provision to open and rack out

the motor supply breakers upon test completion. TS 4.5.3.2 requires

the motor supply breakers to be open while in Modes 4, 5 and 6.

The

inspector was shown a draft revision to the procedure which included

adequate steps.

The procedure additionally specified that maximum

allowed flow was 650 gpm although TS 4.5.2.h.2.b allows up to 660

gpm.

Although the requirement was conservative, it was inconsistent

with other requirements in the procedure.

The same draft revision

also corrected the allowable flew to 660 gpm.

Procedure 14460-1 did

not require venting through valve 1-1204-X4-827, SI Pump Miniflow

Vent Valve. TS 4.5.2.b.1 requires the venting of ECCS pump discharge

piping high points at least once per 31 days.

The applicant stated

that a Temporary Change Procedure (TCP) would be initiated.

The

procedure additionally referred to the A SI pump as 1.

The inspector

verified that the procedure was corrected.

Procedure 14000-1 did not

specify that the surveillances on page 17 were to be performed in

modes 1 or 2 only.

The inspector verified that the procedure was

v

.vr

.

.

.

32

corrected.

The correction of minor comments on procedures 54821-1,

which referenced a deleted TS table, and 55016-1, which contained a

typographical error in a TS reference, was verified. The comments on

the surveillance procedures for the safety injection system in IFI

424/86-117-23 are considered closed.

Paragraph 7.e.

A review of procedure 00404-C, Surveillance Test

Program, Rev.

2,

dated December 3,

1986; 00405-C, Commitment

Identification, Tracking, and Implementation, Rev.

3,

dated

October 22, 1986; and 00051-C, Procedures Review and Approval,

Rev. 5, dated December 1,1986 indicated that the mechanisms to

govern changes to procedures which implement technical specification

commitments and changes to technical specification commitments which

are implemented in procedures were in place.

The aforementioned

procedures will ensure that if changes occur, the changes will be

reflected in the surveillance task cross reference report and the

master surveillance report.

It should be noted that procedure

14935-1, Rev. I draft, which prompted this concern, was approved. A

review of the associated paper work revealed that the individual

responsible for the commitment review failed to identify the deletion

of a commitment.

The appropriate corrections were made when the

error was identified to the reviewer. This part of IFI 424/85-117-23

is closed.

A review of procedure 14721-1, ECCS Subsystem Flow Balance Test,

Rev.1, dated January 2,1987, discloses a revision which changes

the applicability of the procedure to modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.

This

is consistent with TS 4.5.2 and 4.5.3.1.

This part of IFI

424/86-117-23 is closed.

Paragraph 7.f.

Section 6.0, Acceptance Criteria, in both revisions

of procedure 14806-1 did not include observation of proper lubricant

level or check of calibration due dates. Section 8.0 of draft Rev.1

did not include the date of the applicable edition of ASME B&PV code,

Section XI.

The inspector verified that these items had been

corrected. These comments are considered closed. Procedure 54701-1:

(1) did not meet the requirements of TS 4.8.4.2.b, (2) failed to

require the opening and locking of valve 1-1206-U6-029 after comple-

tion of the test, (3) did not include a step to unlock and close

valve 1-1204-U6-018, and (4) did not include independent verification

of the position of 1-1206-U6-018.

The inspector verified that

the licensee had corrected these items.

This portion of IFI

424/86-117-23 is closed.

Paragraph 7.g.

The valve numbers in TS 3/4.6.1.7 were incorrect.

Valves HV-2624 A and B, 4 inch isolation valves in the Containment

Building Post LOCA Exhaust system; and, HV-2627 A and B and HV-2629 A

and B, containment purge and exhaust isolation valves, were not

included in the statement of the LCO. The valve numbers in surveil-

lance requirement 4.6.1.7.1 were not all 24-inch containment purge

33

and exhaust isolation valves as indicated.

HV-2624 A and 8 were 4

inch Containment Building Post LOCA Exhaust isolation valves.

HV-26268 and HV-26-288 were 14-inch Containment Building mini-purge

supply and exhaust isolation valves. The inspector verified that the

numbers in the TS were corrected.

This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23

is closed.

Paragraph 7.h.

The reference to paragraph 7.h in Inspection

Report 424/86-117 was a typographical error.

Coments in this

section were evaluated and no followup was considered necessary.

Paragraph 7.i.

While witnessing the MDAFWP testing, the inspector

noted in procedure 14807 that no step was included in the system

restoration to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic.

The

system restoration section of procedure 14807, Rev.1, now includes a

step to place handswitch HS5131A back into automatic at the conclu-

sion of the MDAFW surveillance test, and to independently verify this

step. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 is closed.

Paragraph 7.J.

The inspector noted that the physics curve book

had not been completed.

During a subsequent inspection, the

inspector determined that the physics curve book was near completion.

The majority of the reactivity data, which had been extracted from

WCAP-11338 and reformatted, had been provided to Reactor Engineering

for review. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-23 will remain open until

completion of the curve book is reviewed.

x.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-24.

Implementation

of the Operational Phase Corrective and Preventive Maintenance

Program.

This item is closed as discussed in paragraph 8 of this

report,

y.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-25.

Ultimate Heat Sink

Technical Specification Clarification.

A revision was to be made to

the ultimate heat sink TS to clarify the wording, remove ambiguities,

and modify a surveillance so that it could be realistically met. The

inspector determined that the changes had been approved and would be

included in the TS.

IFI 424/86-117-25 is closed.

z.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-26.

Verification of

Position of BIT Isolation Valves.

A review of procedure 11006-1,

Chemical and Volume Control System Alignment for Start-up and Normal

Operation, Rev. 3, dated December 29, 1986, contains a revision which

calls for the verification of BIT isolation valves 1-HV 9803 A & B

in the open position with the Limitorque handwheel lon ed.

This

revision satisfies TS requirement 4.5.2.b.2 by designating these

valves, which are in the ECCS flow path, as locked valves, thereby

excluding them from the 31 day correct position verification.

The

inspector field verified that the appropriate locks were installed.

IFI 424/86-117-26 is closed.

34

aa.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Items 424/86-117-27.

TS / Surveillance

Procedure Cross Reference List and Surveillance Procedure Completion.

Some procedures referenced in the TS / surveillance procedure cross

reference list had not been written and/or had not been identified in

the cross reference list.

Procedure 53002-C was shown in the cross

reference list for BOL moderator temperature coefficient surveillance

(TS 4.1.1.3.a) but the licensee did not plan to use the procedure for

the initial startup test and it had not been written. This procedure

will be an integrated low power physics testing procedure to be used

for reloads.

The inspectors confirmed that the procedure to be used

was adequate to meet the surveillance requirements.

The TS cross

reference list did not show which startup tests are used to satisfy

surveillance requirements.

Startup testing will be observed in

future inspections.

The inspectors reviewed a portion of the cross reference list to

confirm that procedures required for Mode 6 had been identified

and completed.

The inspectors provided several minor comments to

the licensee for resolution, but determined that the cross reference

list was adequate for startup.

IFI 424/86-117-27 will remain open

pending further review of the status of procedures required for power

operation.

IFI 424/86-96-05, which involved the review of the

completion of procedures required to meet TS surveillances, is

closely related to IFI 424/86-117-27.

Based on the review of the

surveillance program documented in paragraph 7 and the followup to be

conducted to close IFI 424/86-117-27, IFI 424/86-96-05 is closed.

bb.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-96-05.

Review of Surveil-

lance Procedure Completion.

This item is closed as documented in

paragraph 12.aa.

cc.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-28.

Procedure Revision

for Consistent Definition of Surveillance Test Completion Date and

Time.

Administrative surveillance tracking procedure 00404-C, was

revised by Revision 4 to correct a discrepancy between Section 2.5

and its surveillance task sheet completion instructions, note 20,

concerning the surveillance official completion date and time.

A

surveillance test is now consistently considered complete only after

the test results have been reviewed. Therefore, IFI 424/86-117-28 is

closed.

dd.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-29.

Review of Special

Condition Surveillance Test Triggering Mechanisms.

The inspector

reviewed documentation to determine whether or not the applicant has

adequate triggering mechanisms to ensure certain special condition

surveillances are performed. A computer printout listing all special

condition surveillances for mode 6 and all modes was reviewed.

The

list contained approximately 112 surveillance requirements, the

department responsible for triggering, the department responsible for

.

.

35

completion, and the applicable procedures. The inspector audited 20

surveillance requirements to determine that adequate steps or

precautions had been inserted into the appropriate procedure to

'

trigger the required surveillance test.

In all but one case either an adequate procedure existed, a Temporary

Change Procedure (TCP) had been generated, or a revision was in the

approval process which the inspector reviewed.

The inspector noted

one case where inadequate triggering mechanisms existed.

Procedure

17034-1 did not contain a requirement to verify 125V battery opera-

bility after battery discharge or overcharge within 7 days as

required by TS 4.8.2.2.

Although procedure 17034-1 had been desig-

nated to have the triggering mechanisms for the maintenance

department to perform the surveillance, the revision had not been

done.

This was pointed out to the licensee.

A TCP was immediately

processed.

The inspector reviewed the TCP and found that the change

incorporated the appropriate triggering mechanisms.

!

The inspector reviewed methods and procedures for departments to

keep track of special condition surveillances.

Draft procedure

50045-C, Engineering Special Condition Surveillances, was reviewed.

The procedure included a log for keeping track of active surveil-

lances.

Discussions with responsible personnel indicated that the

,

draft copy reviewed by the inspector was not finalized for approval

and that additional EFPD sensitive surveillances, which were not

requirements for fuel load, were to be incorporated into the

procedure.

The inspector reviewed chemistry procedures 31045-C, Rev.

4, Chemistry Logkeeping, Filing, and Record Storage; and, 30040-C,

4

Rev. 1, Reporting Chemistry Data to Operations Department.

The

procedures were adequate to track surveillances in the Laboratory

Logbook. Special condition surveillances for the Instrumentation and

i

Control Section were primarily associated with instrument calibra-

tions after a seismic event and one associated with RCS pressure

calibration after refueling. The following procedures were reviewed:

18036-C, Rev.0, Seismic Event; 50022-C, Rev. 3, Seismic Event Plan;

55039-C, Rev. O, Seismic Monitoring Instrument System; 12000-1,

Rev.1, Refueling Recovery.

Items will be tracked through Operations

as equipment is placed inoperable.

The Maintenance Department

triggered all of their special condition surveillances through the

planning and work order programs and did not have a log to keep

,

track of active surveillances; however, procedure 20051-C, Rev. O,

Maintenance Work Order Functional Tests, itemized surveillances to

be triggered after certain maintenance items.

This was deemed

adequate.

IFI 424/86-117-29 is closed.

ee.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-30.

Control on the

Location of the B0P Operator.

The inspector reviewed procedure

10000-C, Rev. 3, which had been revised to state that the balance

of plant operator normally remains in the control room.

IFI

424/86-117-30 is closed.

4

- -

.

-

-

-

.

-

-

.

-

- .

- .

-

.

. - -

-

. . -

. - -

. .

- - - - -

-

-

. .

l

36

ff. (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-31.

Key Control .

On

December 11, 1986, during the walk through of the reactor coolant

pump loop 1F-416 procedure, 24790-1, the inspector had observed

that the technician needed to go to the shif t clerk's office three

times to obtain the keys needed to open the reactor solid state

protection system (SSPS) cabinets to perform the surveillance

procedure.

In a letter dated January 13, 1987, which referenced a

memorandum dated January 8, 1987, the licensee stated that the

control of keys to all panels and cabinets which require operator

,

access would be reviewed and validated. The memorandum stated that a

new key control cabinet had been added, that an up-to-date list of

keys had been completed and that the cabinet keys would be validated

by February 6, 1987. By memorandum dated January 15, 1987, a copy of

which was provided to the inspectors, the licensee stated that the

cabinet key controls would be in place by February 21, 1987.

The

inspectors agreed that this date was acceptable. The memorandum also

,

stated in regard to locked doors inside the power block, that these

~

doors would routinely be left unlocked, except vital area doors,

remote shutdown panel doors, essential 4160V AC switchgear room

doors and high radiation area doors.

Due to the types of locks

on some of the interior doors, the licensee stated that certain

locks would have to replaced to allow the doors to be left unlocked.

.

The licensee stated that the locks would be replaced by April 1,

l

1987.

IFI 424/86-117-31 will remain open until these actions are

verified.

gg.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-32. Technical Specifica-

tion Change to Reflect 18 Month Surveillance of Under Voltage and

Shunt Trip Coils on Reactor Trip Breaker. The final TS draft did not

specify testing of the reactor trip breaker undervoltage (UV) and

shunt coils.

Generic letter 83-28 required this testing to be

performed with an 18 month frequency, as a minimum.

The inspector

verified that procedure 14701-1, Rev. 3, had been changed tn

incorporate these items to test the reactor trip breakers unde -

voltage and shunt trip.

IFI 424/86-117-32 is closed.

hh.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-117-33.

Miscellaneous

Technical Issues Identified in Review of Operations Procedures.

This IFI included examples of various technical concerns identified

during the review of operations procedures. Each concern is identi-

,

fied separately below by the paragraph number in Inspection Report

424/86-117.

Paragraph 6.b.6.

Two alarm panels were not displayed above the

i

CCW operating switches in the control room as required by 18020-1

and ARP 17002-1.

The inspector verified that the licensee had

taken action to correct these discrepancies.

This portion of IFI

424/86-117-33 is closed.

i

i

!

-

-

- - - - -

-

.

-

-

.

-

-

- -

- -

- - - -

r

37

Paragraph 6.b.7.

In procedure 18003-1 the following coments were

made.

In step 4.1.2.9, which repeats a reactor coolant pump start

sequence, no reference was made to the reactor coolant pump restart

limitations identified by precautions 2.2.11.2 and 2.2.11.3.

The

seal injection flow shown on Figure 1 showed six to eight gpm,

whereas item 2.2.6 specified 8 to 13 gpm.

The flow logic in the

decision tree depicted in Figure 1 failed at both the " check No. 2

seal leakoff flow" block and at the " check injection and bearing

temperature" block since neither block provided a logical exit from

the block.

The inspector verified that procedure 18004-1, Rev. 2,

corrected the:e items. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.

Paragraph 6.b.9.

The inspector had identified concerns in that

procedure 13610-1 did not contain provisions for monitoring and

responding to adverse bearing oil temperatures for all three AFW

pumps and did not implement provisions for positioning and aligning

the turbine driven AFW pump overspeed test switch (HS-15130) and

speed control potentiometer.

During a walkdown of the AFW system,

the inspectors noted that the turbine driven pump gland seal leakage

was approximately 3 to 5 times greater than that of the motor driven

pumps and appeared to be excessive.

The licensee acknowledged the

concern.

Procedure 11882-1, Outside Areas Round Sheets, did not

provide for a general inspection of the north Main Steam and

Feedwater valve room, the motor driven pump A pump room or the

turbine driven pump pump room.

Also there are no items to check for

adequate pump gland seal leakage and adequate gland seal leakage

drainage from the gland seal leakage reservoir.

The inspector

verified that all of the issues had been satisfactorily addressed by

the licensee except one.

Gland seal leakage from the turbine driven

AFW purrp has not been dispositioned yet.

IFI 424/86-117-33 remains

open to follow the corrective action on the gland seal leakage.

Paragraph 6.b.10.

Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in CS system procedure

13115-1 which addresses TS limits did not include Mode 4 in the

applicable modes as required by TSs.

The inspector verified that

the procedure had been revised.

This portion of IFI

424/86-117-33 is closed.

Paragraph 6.b.11.

Steps 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in procedure 13120-1 did

not list the applicable TS modes.

The inspector verified that the

procedure was revised. This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.

Paragraph 6.c.

The concern involved limiting excessive overtime

for personnel performing safety related functions.

Limiting exces-

sive overtime is addressed by TMI Action Item I.A.1.3.

Procedure

l

00005-C, Rev. 2, Overtime Authorization, now includes the requirement

I

of TS 6.2.2.e that overtime should not be routinely scheduled for

l

personnel responsible for performing safety-related functions.

Procedure 10000-C, which applies to Operations personnel, also

had been revised to state that overtime should not be routinely

scheduled.

This portion of IFI 424/86-117-33 is closed.

l

l

<

w

.

.

.

r

._

.

38

ii.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-02.

Acceptance Criteria

Reviews.

The IFI involved the review of the licensee's procedures

to assure that adequate administrative controls exist for review of

acceptance criteria and determination that the acceptance criteria

are met. This item is discussed in paragraph 7.a.8 of this report.

jj.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-03.

Implementation of

Controls to Assure Adequate MW0s and Assignment of Appropriate

Functional Testing.

The inspector had determined that a MWO did

not designate the functional testing to be performed.

In addition,

the inspector noted that QA audits indicated recurring problems in

the adequacy of MWO instructions and designation of functional tests.

The inspector reviewed the corrective action taken by the licensee.

This review is described in paragraph 8.c. of this report.

IFI

424/87-01-03 is closed.

kk.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-04.

Resolution of Concerns

on the Seismic and Environmental Qualification (EQ) of Radiation

Monitors. This IFI is discussed in paragraph 7.b.1 of this report.

11.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-05.

Review of Temporary

Modifications.

This IFI is closed as discussed in paragraph 9.

The

IFI number will remain assigned to allow tracking of the item.

mm.

(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-06.

Miscellaneous Findings

on Surveillance and Maintenance Procedure Implementation.

The

concerns, which are discussed in paragraph 7.b.3 of this report

included equipment mislabeling and an inadequate lighting safety

concern.

The items were determined to be isolated cases and have

been corrected by the licensee. After obtaining additional informa-

tion from the licensee, the fire doors and a wire radius bend concern

were determined not to be issues.

Therefore, with the exception of

one item, discussed in paragraph 7.b.3, IFI 424/87-01-06 is closed,

nn.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/87-01-07.

Reference of

Nonexistent Setpoint Document in Control Room ARP's.

Control Room

ARP's were found to reference a Master Setpoint Document that was

used in lieu of giving the actual setpoint.

No one in either the

Control Room or the operations department could produce or describe

the document.

The licensee provided revised procedures for the

following ARPs that had previously been noted as deficient.

The

procedures no longer referenced the Master Setpoint Document.

The

procedures reviewed were 17001-1, Rev. 5; 17013-1, Rev. 3; 17014-1,

Rev. 3; 17015-1, Rev. 2; 17016-1, Rev. 2; 17017-1, Rev.1; and,

17020-1, Rev. 3.

The inspector found that the revised procedures

were incorporated into the control room copies.

The inspector

determined that the ARP's in the control room no longer referenced

the document.

IFI 424/87-01-07 is considered closed.

oo.

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 424/86-60-10.

Shift Relief and

Turnover. The item is discussed in paragraph 10.b.