ML20153E309: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Adams | |||
| number = ML20153E309 | |||
| issue date = 04/26/1988 | |||
| title = Insp Rept 50-382/88-09 on 880404-08.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Surveillance Procedures & Records & Verification of RCS Leak Rates | |||
| author name = Bundy H, Mckernon T, Seidle W | |||
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) | |||
| addressee name = | |||
| addressee affiliation = | |||
| docket = 05000382 | |||
| license number = | |||
| contact person = | |||
| document report number = 50-382-88-09, 50-382-88-9, NUDOCS 8805090454 | |||
| package number = ML20153E295 | |||
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS | |||
| page count = 8 | |||
}} | |||
See also: [[see also::IR 05000382/1988009]] | |||
=Text= | |||
{{#Wiki_filter:v - | |||
L e ' | |||
, 1 | |||
W ,n | |||
_ | |||
, | |||
$;~ ; | |||
' | |||
' | |||
1 | |||
,, | |||
.- , | |||
.,;.> j;r i | |||
~. . | |||
, | |||
, , | |||
' | |||
! | |||
' | |||
.- , | |||
APPENDIX | |||
L | |||
" | |||
,- U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .. | |||
^ | |||
REGION IV- | |||
* ' | |||
. NRC Inspection Report: 50-382/88-09 Operating' License: NPF-38 | |||
Docket: 50-3f12 l | |||
, | |||
' Licensee': -Louisiana Po'wer & Light Company (LP&L) - | |||
. | |||
.. | |||
N-80 | |||
317~Baronne Street | |||
New Orlean's, Louisiana 70160 | |||
, | |||
' Facility Name: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (W3) | |||
- | |||
Inspection At: W3, Taft, Louisiana , ; | |||
Inspection Conducted: ' April 4-8, 1988 | |||
. | |||
. | |||
:B | |||
Inspectors: [@ ~' | |||
& | |||
f 7 T. O. McKernon, Reatitor Inspector, Test | |||
y/24Airt | |||
Date | |||
' | |||
Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety _ | |||
' | |||
, | |||
L | |||
. | |||
fWh^ | |||
H FT Eundy, Reactor Inspector, Test Programs | |||
9 fan.ygg | |||
Date i | |||
Section, Division of Reactor Safety , | |||
Accompanied , | |||
By: W. C. Seidle, Chief, Test Programs Section ; | |||
Division of Reactor Safety on April 7-8, 1988 | |||
~ | |||
> | |||
l | |||
Approved: - | |||
- ANT | |||
7.~C. SeidT % Chief, Test Programs Section Date | |||
Division of Keactor Safety , | |||
; | |||
I | |||
Inspection Summa _ry | |||
. r | |||
Inspection Conducted April 4-8, 1988 (Report 50-382/88-09) i | |||
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's | |||
surveillance procedures and records and verification of reactor coolant | |||
system (RCS) leak rates. l | |||
' | |||
8805090454 880505 | |||
PDR ADOCK 05000382 | |||
Q DCD ; | |||
-, - ,- ..,-.-.-,. - - - - -., | |||
, | |||
+ ;- | |||
E . | |||
_., . | |||
, | |||
;. , | |||
- | |||
g | |||
, | |||
-0' | |||
5 | |||
"' , , , | |||
g. .p | |||
2- | |||
, | |||
Results: The procedures and records reviewed in the areas of inservice | |||
inspection of components and inservice testing of pumps and valves pursuant to | |||
10 CFR 50.55a(g) and ASME Section XI appeared to satisfy all requirements. -The | |||
procedures and records related to Technical Specifications required . | |||
surveillances appeared to satisfy ~ all requirements. However, an area of | |||
confusion relating to anomalies in calibration and control of measuring and | |||
test equipment was identified (paragraph 2). The NRC inspectors verified the | |||
se ~ | |||
~ | |||
adequacy of the licensee's calculating technique 3 for determining RCS leak | |||
rates, | |||
h | |||
J | |||
J | |||
L | |||
4 | |||
$ | |||
it | |||
_. | |||
, | |||
, | |||
, | |||
NE , | |||
.( - | |||
,o | |||
.- . . ; 4 m | |||
- | |||
c | |||
3 | |||
, | |||
DETAILS | |||
'* | |||
, | |||
1. Persons'Contactjd | |||
.. LP&L | |||
~ | |||
R. Barkhurst, ' lice President, Nuclear / Site Director | |||
*N. Carns, Plant Manager | |||
*P. Backes, Special Assistant to Vice President | |||
*P. Prasankumar, Plant Technical Services Manager j | |||
*S. Allenan, Quality Assurance Manager , | |||
R. Starkey, Operations Superintendent | |||
*T. Smith, Plant Engineering Superintendent | |||
*G. Wuller, Operational Licensing S_upervisor | |||
+0. Schultr, Operations Shift Technical Aovisor Supervisor | |||
G. Koehler, Operations Quality Assurance Supervisor | |||
*D. Baker, Event Analysis and Response Supervisor | |||
L. Bass, Technical Support Supervisor | |||
*G. Robin, Inservice Inspection Coordinator | |||
*A. Harris, Shift Technical Advisor | |||
C. DeDeaux. Technical Specifications Coordinstor | |||
. | |||
' | |||
NRC , | |||
y~ ' *W. Smith, Senior Resident Inspector | |||
T. Staker, Resident Inspector | |||
*E. Tomlinson, Nuclear Reactor Regulation . | |||
*W. C. Seidle, Chief, Test Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety | |||
The NRC-inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel during the | |||
inspection. | |||
* Denotes those attending the exit interview on April 8, 1988. | |||
2. e | |||
Surveillanc_efroceduresandRecords (61700) | |||
The purpose of this part of the inspection was to ascertain whether the | |||
surveillance of safety-related systems and components was being conducted | |||
in accordance with approved procedures as required by the licensee's | |||
Technical Specifications (TS) Inservice Inspection (ISI) Plan, and | |||
, | |||
InserviceTesting(IST) Plan. Pursuant to this ob.iective, the NRC | |||
, | |||
inspectors reviewed the following licensee documents: | |||
* 10 Year Inservice Inspection Program, Revision 3 (ISI Plan) | |||
* W3 LP&L Pump and Valve Inservice Test Plan, Revision 5 (IST Plan) | |||
The NRC inspectors then selected certain TS surveillance requirements and | |||
components listed in the ISI and IST Plans and reviewed the associated | |||
licentea test procec'ures and an appropriate number of test results records | |||
- . | |||
- - - - . , - - - _ . - - , .,. , . - - - - ,. ., | |||
- | |||
~ | |||
. | |||
9 , | |||
- | |||
. | |||
, , | |||
l ,- | |||
,*, ,. - | |||
s; | |||
* ', , | |||
4 | |||
, | |||
for each procedure. The TS surveillance requirements of ISI or IST | |||
components together with the associated test procedures reviewed by the | |||
NRC inspectors are tabulated in the attachment. | |||
The NRC inspectors determined that the required tests were being scheduled | |||
and performed as required in accordance with approved procedures. | |||
Acceptance criteria were specified in the procedures, and the records | |||
st0ted satisfaction of acceptance criteria. Appropriate instructions for | |||
returning equipment to service following testing were given. Also, | |||
selected test personnel were verified to have appropriate certifications. | |||
All requiren nts appeared to have been satisfied. However, anomalies in | |||
calibration tnd control of measuring and test equipment (M&TE) discovered | |||
in one test record are discussed below. | |||
During a review of records pertaining to Surveillance Procedure MI-3-305, | |||
Revision 3. "Instrumentation Loop Check," dated October 24, 1986, for | |||
Bistable SG-IL 1113C, it was noted that Task Card No. 1, Note 1 indicated | |||
that one of the test equipment maters was out of tolerance. In particular, | |||
the record stated, ". . . as found data for SG-ILEI-1113C, TBB 19 and 20 | |||
is out of tolerance due to bad (out of tolerance) test equipment. No | |||
adjustments were made. As left data was taken with good test equipment." | |||
The NRC inspectors noted that five M&TE items were listed on the test | |||
record; Decade Bcx, MIET 124.006; Transmation 1040, MIET 76.022; Keithley, | |||
MIET 41.010; Fluka 8600. MIET 20.100; and Transmatien 1040, MIET 76.028. | |||
' During subsequent inspection, the NRC inspectors found that only two of | |||
the five test meters could have been suspect; these were Keithley MIET 41.010 | |||
and the Fluke 8600, MIET 20.100 meters. Through discussions with the M&TE | |||
supervisor, it was determined that no records of Condition Identified (CIs) | |||
or Nonconformance E(aluation Reports had been generated. The licensee's | |||
administrative procedures required the M&TE user to report suspect "out of | |||
tolerance" test equipment to the facility meter issue personnel. | |||
When a suspect "out cf tolerance" test equipi.,ent item is identified, a CI | |||
and a Nonconformance rvaluation Report are generated. In this manner a | |||
formal review of other test data taken with the suspect test equipment can | |||
be performed and an evaluation for safety-related concerns made. Since | |||
none of the M&TE equipment listed on the test record had CIs or | |||
Nonconfonnance Evaluation Reports generated during or af ter the usage | |||
period, it appeared M&TE calibration was in-tolerance. Further, although | |||
the as-found data were recorded using the suspect M&TE, the suspect M&TE | |||
was not identified on the test record. | |||
Through discussions with the licensee, it was postulated that the involved | |||
technician recorded the "as-found" data with an out-of-tolerance test | |||
meter and then turned the suspect meter into the facility meter issue | |||
personnel. Upon receiving a good meter from the issue facility, the | |||
technician took and recorded the "6s-left" data and the instrument identity | |||
on the task card. The technician did not record the identity of the test | |||
instrument with which the "as-found" data was measured. The licensee's | |||
Administrative Procedure MD-1-021. Revision 1, "M&TE Accountability," | |||
required the MATE user to record the M&TE identity on the task card. | |||
--. .--,. - | |||
- - . - - _ - . _ | |||
.- - -.- . ---. | |||
. _- _ - - _ _ _ .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _- - _ ___ ___ ____ _ _ ___ _ _ __ __ __-_ - ____________ _ _ _ __ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | |||
~ | |||
. | |||
... . . | |||
' | |||
5 | |||
- | |||
However, Adminsitrative Procedure MD-1-021 Revision 0, the procedure in | |||
, | |||
effect during the surveillance, did not specifically require the recording , | |||
of M&TE identity on the task card. The licensee stated that the general | |||
; practice used by the 18C technicians is to record the identity of the M&TE | |||
" | |||
upon completion of the procedure. If during the procedure, a suspect | |||
, | |||
instrument is identified, the instrument is returned to the issue | |||
i facility, and a good meter checked out. The procedure is then reperformed, | |||
in toto, using the in-tolerance instrument and the M&TE identity is | |||
recorded on the task card. t | |||
. . | |||
From the above discussion, there appears to be no safety significence in | |||
that the licensee took and recorded the as-left data with an in-tolerance | |||
meter. No adjustments were made to system instrumentation and the | |||
identity of the good M&TE was recorded on the task card. | |||
However, it is significant to note that the licensee's procedures for M&TE | |||
accountability do not relate with the same specificity, in writing, as | |||
fenerally practiced. Revision 1 of the M&TE accountability procedure | |||
specifies that the identity of M&TE be recorded on the task card. | |||
However, the implementation of this procedure is left to the | |||
inttepretation of the M&TE user. M&TE traceability is vital to a | |||
comprahensive M&TE program. If a general work practice is acceptable and | |||
has shown success in its effectuation, then confusion and errors can be | |||
avoided by incorporating the practice into the licensee's procedure. The | |||
NRC inspectors concluded that the licensee should consider a revision to | |||
' | |||
the existing procedure to include more delineated guidance, | |||
f Within tha scope of this inspection, no violations or deviations were | |||
identified. | |||
3. Verification of Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Leak Rates (61728) | |||
During this inspection, the NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's | |||
procedure for RCS inventory leakage calculation. The following records | |||
for RCS inventory accountability were reviewed: | |||
. | |||
* OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 0445 hours | |||
OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 0710 hours | |||
* OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 1640 hours | |||
* * OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 1758 hours | |||
* OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 31, 1988, 0005 hours | |||
The NRC inspectors verified that the licensee's calculating technique for | |||
determining RCS leak rates was satisfactory. By utilizing the licensee's | |||
RCS data und inputting this data into the NRC's RCSLK9 program, the NRC | |||
inspectors verified the correctness of the licensee's calculated | |||
" | |||
identified and unidentified leak rates. For those leak rate results | |||
outside the limiting conditions for operation, the NRC inspectors reviewed | |||
.l the licensee's response and timeliness in identifying, isolating, and | |||
; | |||
i | |||
I | |||
: | |||
- --a-mn e.e-y ? 4m'- y- yeryy-v -w-y, w mq- - | |||
w e amy,-m =*+-y - - - - * = - - - - - | |||
_ ., , . . _ . _ . - ___ . _ ~ - _ __ _. _ | |||
% e | |||
-t * 'e e o | |||
. | |||
'- | |||
' | |||
_6 , | |||
f | |||
1: | |||
I reporting the incident to the NRC. In addition, the NRC inspectors | |||
verified that post-event leak rates were within the acceptable limits of ; | |||
the Technical Specifications. | |||
' | |||
i < | |||
Within the scope of this inspection, no violations or deviations were i | |||
identified. | |||
' | |||
4. Exit Interview | |||
I | |||
' | |||
' | |||
The NRC inspectors met with licenseo representatives denoted in Saction 1 | |||
on April 8, 1988, and summarized the scope and findings of the insoection. | |||
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials trovided | |||
to or reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection. | |||
, | |||
'. | |||
' | |||
I | |||
s | |||
> | |||
i | |||
, | |||
t | |||
;i | |||
! t | |||
: | |||
I | |||
i | |||
l | |||
ll | |||
; | |||
l | |||
; | |||
l' ! | |||
; | |||
e | |||
; | |||
! l | |||
I I | |||
! , | |||
; | |||
' | |||
.. .-._ _ _- _ _ ..__.._, _ _. -._.._. _ _ . . . , _ . _ - . . , . _ . _ . _ _ , _ _ _ , . . - _ . , . _ . _ . _ . . _ _ - - _ . | |||
___ _______ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ | |||
. . .. ; . | |||
\ | |||
ATTACHMENT | |||
PROCEDURES AND RECORDS REVIEWED | |||
Requirement / | |||
, Component Description -Test Procedures | |||
TS 4.1.2.2C Verify correct actuation of auto valves OP-903-029 R4 | |||
in boron injection flow path on SIAS | |||
. | |||
TS 4.1.3.4C Verify drop times-for full-length CEAs NE-02-020. R0 | |||
TS 4.3.2.1, Containment. spray (CSAS) containment MI-3-201, R4 | |||
Table 4.3-2, pressure high-high channel calibration OP-903-107, R3 | |||
Item 2.b | |||
TS 4.3.2.1, SG level low and delta P high emergency MI-3-305,.R3 | |||
Table 4.3-2, feedwater(EFAS)tripchannel MI-3-306, R4 | |||
Item 7.b calibration MI-3-201, R4 | |||
4 | |||
TS 4.4.3.1.3a Verify pressurizer heaters are OP-903-028. R2 | |||
and b automatically shed from emergency power | |||
sources on SIAS and verify heaters can | |||
be energized from control room | |||
TS 4.4.6 Verify dissolved oxygen, chlorine, and CE-2-006, R5 | |||
fluorine are within limits | |||
TS 4.5.1d Verify SI tank isolation valves open OP-903-025, R1 | |||
when RCS pressure exceeds 535 psia and OP-903-029, R3 ' | |||
upon receipt of SI test signal ; | |||
TS 4.5.2e1 Verify each auto valve in ECCS subsystem OP-903-029, R3 i | |||
actuates to correct position on SIAS and OP-903-091, R2 | |||
RAS | |||
TS 4.6.1.3c Verify only one door in each containment PE-5-024. R2 ' , | |||
air lock can be opened at a time OP-903-113, R0 | |||
TS 4.6.2.2b Verify that each containment cooling fan OP-903-029, R3 - | |||
group starts automatically on SIAS and | |||
4 | |||
verify cooling water flow g,1325 gpm | |||
r | |||
TS 4.7.3b Verify each CCW/ACCW valve servicing OP-903-029, R3 | |||
' safety-related equipment actuates to OP-903-036, R4 | |||
correct position on SIAS and CSAS test , | |||
: | |||
< signals | |||
1 | |||
, | |||
, -m- y _ - a__. ._,y _ , . , _ . . _ - , - _ _ - - - - - - - - - , . _ _ . - , - . _ - - - - - - - | |||
, , _ , , | |||
3, ,- s | |||
- - | |||
..., ' ,; | |||
. . . . . . . - , | |||
' | |||
2 | |||
.! | |||
" | |||
Requirement / | |||
Component Description Test Procedures | |||
' | |||
TS 4.8.2.1d -Verify 125 VDC battery capacity is ' | |||
ME-3-230. R5 | |||
adequate | |||
TS 4.7.10.1.1f Perform functional test of fire OPa903-056, R5 * | |||
sup3ression water system by verifying OP-903-077 R2 | |||
eac1 pump delivers 2000 gpm at 100 psid, ' | |||
cycling each valve in flow path not | |||
testable during plant operation, and , | |||
sequential pump start to maintain system | |||
pressure at 96.5 psig- | |||
TS 4.7.10.1.3c Inspection of diesel fire pumps 12 V ME-3-100, R2 | |||
starting batteries | |||
. | |||
' | |||
IST/ Charging Test CVCS charging pump 00-903-003, R6 | |||
Pump A - | |||
IST/ Valve Test valve in safety injection system OP-903-032, R5 | |||
SI-138A | |||
ISI Mministrative procedure for controlling N0EP-251, RO | |||
ISI | |||
, | |||
ISI/ Class 1 RCS Perform RCS leak check prior to startup QI-009-003,R1- | |||
Pressure Boundary | |||
IS7/ Weld 04-012 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-47, R0 | |||
(RC) | |||
ISI/ Weld 17-039 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-206, R0 | |||
(SI) . | |||
' | |||
' | |||
ISI/ Weld 42-022 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-E06, R0, | |||
FCI | |||
(MS) | |||
Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-206, RO, | |||
ISI/ Weld 48-001 | |||
FCI | |||
(FW) | |||
Perform PT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-11, R0 | |||
ISI/ Weld 58-002 | |||
(CS) | |||
Perform visual inspection of restraint WTR-IST4, R0 | |||
ISI/ Restraint | |||
ACR-462 (AC) , | |||
ISI/ Spring Hanger Perform visual checks of spring hanger WTR-ISI-8, R0 | |||
, ' | |||
FWSH-348(FW) | |||
- . . . - . .. .-. -.- - - . - - -. .- . - - - - , _ _ - . | |||
}} |
Latest revision as of 01:11, 18 December 2020
ML20153E309 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Waterford |
Issue date: | 04/26/1988 |
From: | Bundy H, Mckernon T, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML20153E295 | List: |
References | |
50-382-88-09, 50-382-88-9, NUDOCS 8805090454 | |
Download: ML20153E309 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000382/1988009
Text
v -
L e '
, 1
W ,n
_
,
$;~ ;
'
'
1
,,
.- ,
.,;.> j;r i
~. .
,
, ,
'
!
'
.- ,
APPENDIX
L
"
,- U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ..
^
REGION IV-
- '
. NRC Inspection Report: 50-382/88-09 Operating' License: NPF-38
Docket: 50-3f12 l
,
' Licensee': -Louisiana Po'wer & Light Company (LP&L) -
.
..
N-80
317~Baronne Street
New Orlean's, Louisiana 70160
,
' Facility Name: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (W3)
-
Inspection At: W3, Taft, Louisiana , ;
Inspection Conducted: ' April 4-8, 1988
.
.
- B
Inspectors: [@ ~'
&
f 7 T. O. McKernon, Reatitor Inspector, Test
y/24Airt
Date
'
Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety _
'
,
L
.
fWh^
H FT Eundy, Reactor Inspector, Test Programs
9 fan.ygg
Date i
Section, Division of Reactor Safety ,
Accompanied ,
By: W. C. Seidle, Chief, Test Programs Section ;
Division of Reactor Safety on April 7-8, 1988
~
>
l
Approved: -
- ANT
7.~C. SeidT % Chief, Test Programs Section Date
Division of Keactor Safety ,
I
Inspection Summa _ry
. r
Inspection Conducted April 4-8, 1988 (Report 50-382/88-09) i
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's
surveillance procedures and records and verification of reactor coolant
system (RCS) leak rates. l
'
8805090454 880505
PDR ADOCK 05000382
Q DCD ;
-, - ,- ..,-.-.-,. - - - - -.,
,
+ ;-
E .
_., .
,
- . ,
-
g
,
-0'
5
"' , , ,
g. .p
2-
,
Results: The procedures and records reviewed in the areas of inservice
inspection of components and inservice testing of pumps and valves pursuant to
10 CFR 50.55a(g) and ASME Section XI appeared to satisfy all requirements. -The
procedures and records related to Technical Specifications required .
surveillances appeared to satisfy ~ all requirements. However, an area of
confusion relating to anomalies in calibration and control of measuring and
test equipment was identified (paragraph 2). The NRC inspectors verified the
se ~
~
adequacy of the licensee's calculating technique 3 for determining RCS leak
rates,
h
J
J
L
4
$
it
_.
,
,
,
NE ,
.( -
,o
.- . . ; 4 m
-
c
3
,
DETAILS
'*
,
1. Persons'Contactjd
.. LP&L
~
R. Barkhurst, ' lice President, Nuclear / Site Director
- N. Carns, Plant Manager
- P. Backes, Special Assistant to Vice President
- P. Prasankumar, Plant Technical Services Manager j
- S. Allenan, Quality Assurance Manager ,
R. Starkey, Operations Superintendent
- T. Smith, Plant Engineering Superintendent
- G. Wuller, Operational Licensing S_upervisor
+0. Schultr, Operations Shift Technical Aovisor Supervisor
G. Koehler, Operations Quality Assurance Supervisor
- D. Baker, Event Analysis and Response Supervisor
L. Bass, Technical Support Supervisor
- G. Robin, Inservice Inspection Coordinator
- A. Harris, Shift Technical Advisor
C. DeDeaux. Technical Specifications Coordinstor
.
'
NRC ,
y~ ' *W. Smith, Senior Resident Inspector
T. Staker, Resident Inspector
- E. Tomlinson, Nuclear Reactor Regulation .
- W. C. Seidle, Chief, Test Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety
The NRC-inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel during the
inspection.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview on April 8, 1988.
2. e
Surveillanc_efroceduresandRecords (61700)
The purpose of this part of the inspection was to ascertain whether the
surveillance of safety-related systems and components was being conducted
in accordance with approved procedures as required by the licensee's
Technical Specifications (TS) Inservice Inspection (ISI) Plan, and
,
InserviceTesting(IST) Plan. Pursuant to this ob.iective, the NRC
,
inspectors reviewed the following licensee documents:
- 10 Year Inservice Inspection Program, Revision 3 (ISI Plan)
The NRC inspectors then selected certain TS surveillance requirements and
components listed in the ISI and IST Plans and reviewed the associated
licentea test procec'ures and an appropriate number of test results records
- .
- - - - . , - - - _ . - - , .,. , . - - - - ,. .,
-
~
.
9 ,
-
.
, ,
l ,-
,*, ,. -
s;
- ', ,
4
,
for each procedure. The TS surveillance requirements of ISI or IST
components together with the associated test procedures reviewed by the
NRC inspectors are tabulated in the attachment.
The NRC inspectors determined that the required tests were being scheduled
and performed as required in accordance with approved procedures.
Acceptance criteria were specified in the procedures, and the records
st0ted satisfaction of acceptance criteria. Appropriate instructions for
returning equipment to service following testing were given. Also,
selected test personnel were verified to have appropriate certifications.
All requiren nts appeared to have been satisfied. However, anomalies in
calibration tnd control of measuring and test equipment (M&TE) discovered
in one test record are discussed below.
During a review of records pertaining to Surveillance Procedure MI-3-305,
Revision 3. "Instrumentation Loop Check," dated October 24, 1986, for
Bistable SG-IL 1113C, it was noted that Task Card No. 1, Note 1 indicated
that one of the test equipment maters was out of tolerance. In particular,
the record stated, ". . . as found data for SG-ILEI-1113C, TBB 19 and 20
is out of tolerance due to bad (out of tolerance) test equipment. No
adjustments were made. As left data was taken with good test equipment."
The NRC inspectors noted that five M&TE items were listed on the test
record; Decade Bcx, MIET 124.006; Transmation 1040, MIET 76.022; Keithley,
MIET 41.010; Fluka 8600. MIET 20.100; and Transmatien 1040, MIET 76.028.
' During subsequent inspection, the NRC inspectors found that only two of
the five test meters could have been suspect; these were Keithley MIET 41.010
and the Fluke 8600, MIET 20.100 meters. Through discussions with the M&TE
supervisor, it was determined that no records of Condition Identified (CIs)
or Nonconformance E(aluation Reports had been generated. The licensee's
administrative procedures required the M&TE user to report suspect "out of
tolerance" test equipment to the facility meter issue personnel.
When a suspect "out cf tolerance" test equipi.,ent item is identified, a CI
and a Nonconformance rvaluation Report are generated. In this manner a
formal review of other test data taken with the suspect test equipment can
be performed and an evaluation for safety-related concerns made. Since
none of the M&TE equipment listed on the test record had CIs or
Nonconfonnance Evaluation Reports generated during or af ter the usage
period, it appeared M&TE calibration was in-tolerance. Further, although
the as-found data were recorded using the suspect M&TE, the suspect M&TE
was not identified on the test record.
Through discussions with the licensee, it was postulated that the involved
technician recorded the "as-found" data with an out-of-tolerance test
meter and then turned the suspect meter into the facility meter issue
personnel. Upon receiving a good meter from the issue facility, the
technician took and recorded the "6s-left" data and the instrument identity
on the task card. The technician did not record the identity of the test
instrument with which the "as-found" data was measured. The licensee's
Administrative Procedure MD-1-021. Revision 1, "M&TE Accountability,"
required the MATE user to record the M&TE identity on the task card.
--. .--,. -
- - . - - _ - . _
.- - -.- . ---.
. _- _ - - _ _ _ .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _- - _ ___ ___ ____ _ _ ___ _ _ __ __ __-_ - ____________ _ _ _ __ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
~
.
... . .
'
5
-
However, Adminsitrative Procedure MD-1-021 Revision 0, the procedure in
,
effect during the surveillance, did not specifically require the recording ,
of M&TE identity on the task card. The licensee stated that the general
- practice used by the 18C technicians is to record the identity of the M&TE
"
upon completion of the procedure. If during the procedure, a suspect
,
instrument is identified, the instrument is returned to the issue
i facility, and a good meter checked out. The procedure is then reperformed,
in toto, using the in-tolerance instrument and the M&TE identity is
recorded on the task card. t
. .
From the above discussion, there appears to be no safety significence in
that the licensee took and recorded the as-left data with an in-tolerance
meter. No adjustments were made to system instrumentation and the
identity of the good M&TE was recorded on the task card.
However, it is significant to note that the licensee's procedures for M&TE
accountability do not relate with the same specificity, in writing, as
fenerally practiced. Revision 1 of the M&TE accountability procedure
specifies that the identity of M&TE be recorded on the task card.
However, the implementation of this procedure is left to the
inttepretation of the M&TE user. M&TE traceability is vital to a
comprahensive M&TE program. If a general work practice is acceptable and
has shown success in its effectuation, then confusion and errors can be
avoided by incorporating the practice into the licensee's procedure. The
NRC inspectors concluded that the licensee should consider a revision to
'
the existing procedure to include more delineated guidance,
f Within tha scope of this inspection, no violations or deviations were
identified.
3. Verification of Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Leak Rates (61728)
During this inspection, the NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's
procedure for RCS inventory leakage calculation. The following records
for RCS inventory accountability were reviewed:
.
- OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 0445 hours0.00515 days <br />0.124 hours <br />7.357804e-4 weeks <br />1.693225e-4 months <br />
OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 0710 hours0.00822 days <br />0.197 hours <br />0.00117 weeks <br />2.70155e-4 months <br />
- OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 1640 hours0.019 days <br />0.456 hours <br />0.00271 weeks <br />6.2402e-4 months <br />
- * OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 30, 1988, 1758 hours0.0203 days <br />0.488 hours <br />0.00291 weeks <br />6.68919e-4 months <br />
- OP-903-024, Revision 6, dated March 31, 1988, 0005 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />
The NRC inspectors verified that the licensee's calculating technique for
determining RCS leak rates was satisfactory. By utilizing the licensee's
RCS data und inputting this data into the NRC's RCSLK9 program, the NRC
inspectors verified the correctness of the licensee's calculated
"
identified and unidentified leak rates. For those leak rate results
outside the limiting conditions for operation, the NRC inspectors reviewed
.l the licensee's response and timeliness in identifying, isolating, and
i
I
- --a-mn e.e-y ? 4m'- y- yeryy-v -w-y, w mq- -
w e amy,-m =*+-y - - - - * = - - - - -
_ ., , . . _ . _ . - ___ . _ ~ - _ __ _. _
% e
-t * 'e e o
.
'-
'
_6 ,
f
1:
I reporting the incident to the NRC. In addition, the NRC inspectors
verified that post-event leak rates were within the acceptable limits of ;
the Technical Specifications.
'
i <
Within the scope of this inspection, no violations or deviations were i
identified.
'
4. Exit Interview
I
'
'
The NRC inspectors met with licenseo representatives denoted in Saction 1
on April 8, 1988, and summarized the scope and findings of the insoection.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials trovided
to or reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection.
,
'.
'
I
s
>
i
,
t
- i
! t
I
i
l
ll
l
l' !
e
! l
I I
! ,
'
.. .-._ _ _- _ _ ..__.._, _ _. -._.._. _ _ . . . , _ . _ - . . , . _ . _ . _ _ , _ _ _ , . . - _ . , . _ . _ . _ . . _ _ - - _ .
___ _______ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
. . .. ; .
\
ATTACHMENT
PROCEDURES AND RECORDS REVIEWED
Requirement /
, Component Description -Test Procedures
TS 4.1.2.2C Verify correct actuation of auto valves OP-903-029 R4
in boron injection flow path on SIAS
.
TS 4.1.3.4C Verify drop times-for full-length CEAs NE-02-020. R0
TS 4.3.2.1, Containment. spray (CSAS) containment MI-3-201, R4
Table 4.3-2, pressure high-high channel calibration OP-903-107, R3
Item 2.b
TS 4.3.2.1, SG level low and delta P high emergency MI-3-305,.R3
Table 4.3-2, feedwater(EFAS)tripchannel MI-3-306, R4
Item 7.b calibration MI-3-201, R4
4
TS 4.4.3.1.3a Verify pressurizer heaters are OP-903-028. R2
and b automatically shed from emergency power
sources on SIAS and verify heaters can
be energized from control room
TS 4.4.6 Verify dissolved oxygen, chlorine, and CE-2-006, R5
fluorine are within limits
TS 4.5.1d Verify SI tank isolation valves open OP-903-025, R1
when RCS pressure exceeds 535 psia and OP-903-029, R3 '
upon receipt of SI test signal ;
TS 4.5.2e1 Verify each auto valve in ECCS subsystem OP-903-029, R3 i
actuates to correct position on SIAS and OP-903-091, R2
TS 4.6.1.3c Verify only one door in each containment PE-5-024. R2 ' ,
air lock can be opened at a time OP-903-113, R0
TS 4.6.2.2b Verify that each containment cooling fan OP-903-029, R3 -
group starts automatically on SIAS and
4
verify cooling water flow g,1325 gpm
r
TS 4.7.3b Verify each CCW/ACCW valve servicing OP-903-029, R3
' safety-related equipment actuates to OP-903-036, R4
correct position on SIAS and CSAS test ,
< signals
1
,
, -m- y _ - a__. ._,y _ , . , _ . . _ - , - _ _ - - - - - - - - - , . _ _ . - , - . _ - - - - - - -
, , _ , ,
3, ,- s
- -
..., ' ,;
. . . . . . . - ,
'
2
.!
"
Requirement /
Component Description Test Procedures
'
TS 4.8.2.1d -Verify 125 VDC battery capacity is '
ME-3-230. R5
adequate
TS 4.7.10.1.1f Perform functional test of fire OPa903-056, R5 *
sup3ression water system by verifying OP-903-077 R2
eac1 pump delivers 2000 gpm at 100 psid, '
cycling each valve in flow path not
testable during plant operation, and ,
sequential pump start to maintain system
pressure at 96.5 psig-
TS 4.7.10.1.3c Inspection of diesel fire pumps 12 V ME-3-100, R2
starting batteries
.
'
IST/ Charging Test CVCS charging pump 00-903-003, R6
Pump A -
IST/ Valve Test valve in safety injection system OP-903-032, R5
SI-138A
ISI Mministrative procedure for controlling N0EP-251, RO
,
ISI/ Class 1 RCS Perform RCS leak check prior to startup QI-009-003,R1-
Pressure Boundary
IS7/ Weld 04-012 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-47, R0
(RC)
ISI/ Weld 17-039 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-206, R0
(SI) .
'
'
ISI/ Weld 42-022 Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-E06, R0,
(MS)
Perform UT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-206, RO,
ISI/ Weld 48-001
(FW)
Perform PT inspection of weld WTR-ISI-11, R0
ISI/ Weld 58-002
(CS)
Perform visual inspection of restraint WTR-IST4, R0
ISI/ Restraint
ACR-462 (AC) ,
ISI/ Spring Hanger Perform visual checks of spring hanger WTR-ISI-8, R0
, '
FWSH-348(FW)
- . . . - . .. .-. -.- - - . - - -. .- . - - - - , _ _ - .