ML17221A615
| ML17221A615 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 01/11/1988 |
| From: | Bibb H, Christensen H, Crlenjak R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17221A611 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-87-25, 50-389-87-24, NUDOCS 8802100324 | |
| Download: ML17221A615 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000335/1987025
Text
~gS AEVI
(4
0
eo
d.'v e
o
s*+
0
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323
Report Nos.:
50-335/87-25
and 50-389/87-24
Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company
9250 West Flagler Street
Miami, FL
33102
Docket Nos.:
50-335
and 50-389
License Nos.:
Facility Name:
St.
Lucie j. and
2
Inspection
Conducted:
November
1 - December
5,
1987
Inspector:
r en'
en>or
es>
en
nspec or
oS0-
~
.
>
,
es>
en
nspector
Approved by: 7W8&
r)s ensen,
ec
>on
>e
c >ng
Division of Reactor Projects
/ /i P'
e
~gne/'s
a
e
>gne
e
cygne
SUMMARY
Scope:
This inspection
involved on site activities in the areas of Technical
Specification
compliance,
operator
performance,
overall
plant operations,
quality
assurance
practices,
station
and
corporate
management
practices,
corrective
and
preventive
maintenance
activities, site security procedures,
radiation
control
activities,
surveillance
activities,
and
refueling
activities.
Results:
Of the areas
inspected,
one violation was identified (paragraph
7)
8S0"1003
4 Seoli4
ADQC)( 05000335
G
REPORT DETAILS
Person
Contacted
Licensee
Employees
K. Harris, St.
Lucie Vice President
"G.
J
~ Boissy, Plant Manager
R. Sipos,
Services
Manager
.
~J.
H. Barrow, Operations
Superintendent
T.
A. Diliard, Maintenance
Superintendent
J.
B. Harper,
gA Superintendent
J.
West, Operations
Supervisor (Acting)
R. J. Frechette,
Chemistry Supervisor
C.
F.
Leppla,
I8C Supervisor
CD
A. Pell, Technical Staff Supervisor
E. J. Wunderlich,
Reactor
Engineering Supervisor
H.
F.
Buchanan,
Health Physics
Supervisor
W. White, Security Supervisor
"C.
L. Burton, Reliability and Support Supervisor
J,
Barrow, Fire Prevention
Coordinator
R.
E.
Dawson, Assistant Plant Superintendent
- Electrical
C. Wilson, Assistant Plant Superintendent
- Mechanical
"N.
G.
Roos, guality Control Supervisor
Other licensee
employees
contacted
included technicians,
operators,
mechanics,
security force members
and office personnel.
"Attended exit interview
Exit Interview
The inspection
scope
and findings were
summarized
on
December
21,
1987,
with
those
persons
indicated
in paragraph
1
above.
The
inspectors
described
the
areas
inspected
and
discussed
in detail
the inspection
findings listed below.
Dissenting
comments
were not received
from the
licensee.
Violation 50-335/87-24-01:
Entry into an operational
mode without meeting
the conditions of LCO 3. 6. 6. 2 being met.
The licensee
did not identify as proprietary any of the materials
provided
to or reviewed by the inspectors
during this inspection.
Plant Tours (Units
1 and 2)
The inspectors
conducted
plant tours periodically during the inspection
interval to verify that monitoring equipment
was
recording
as required,
4.
equipment
was properly tagged,
operations
personnel
were
aware of plant
conditions,
and plant
housekeeping efforts were adequate.
The inspectors
also
determined
that
appropriate
radiation
controls
were
properly
established,
critical clean areas
were being controlled'in accordance
with
procedures,
excess
equipment
or material
was
stored
properly
and
combustible
materials
and debris
were disposed of expeditiously.
During
tours,
the inspectors
looked for the existence
of unusual
fIuid leaks,
,
piping vibrations,
pipe'anger.
and seismic restraint settings,
various
valve
and breaker positions,
equipment caution
and danger tags,
component
. positions.
adequacy of fire fighting equipment,
and instrument calibration
da'tes.
Some tours were conducted
on backshifts.
The
inspectors
routinely conducted
partial
walkdowns of
systems.
Valve,
breaker/switch
lineups
and
equipment
conditions
were
randomly
verified both locally
and in the control
room.
During the inspection
period
the
inspectors
conducted
a complete
walkdown in the accessible
areas
of the Unit 1 component cooling water and emergency
diesel
generator
systems,
and Unit 1 and
2 chemical
and
volume control
system to verify
that
the
lineups
were
in accordance
with licensee
requirements
for
operability
and
equipment
material
conditions
were
satisfactory.
Additionally,
flowpath verifications
were
performed
on the following
systems:
emergency
diesel
generator
fuel oil and air start
and auxiliary
Plant Operations
Review (Units
1 and 2)
The inspectors,
periodically during the
inspection
interval,
reviewed
shift logs
and
operations
records,
including data
sheets,
instrument
traces,
and
records
of equipment
malfunctions.
This
review included
control- room logs
and auxiliary logs, operating orders,
standing orders,
jumper
logs
and
equipment
tagout
records.
The
inspectors
routinely
observed
operator
alertness
and
demeanor
during plant tours.
During
routine
operations,
operator
performance
and
response
actions
were
observed
and
evaluated.
The
inspectors
conducted
random off-hours
inspections
during the reporting interval to assure
that operations
and
security
remained
at
an acceptable
level.
Shift turnovers
were observed
to verify that they were
conducted
in accordance
with approved
licensee
procedures.
The inspectors
performed
an in-depth review of the following
safety-related
tagout (clearances):
Unit 1
1-11-43
lA INSTRUMENT AIR COMPRESSOR-"PM
1-11-46
PM ON FAN HVE 6B
1-11-47
1B DIESEL GENERATOR SOAKBACK PUMPS
Unit 2
2-11-363
FUEL HANDLING BUILDING FAN HVS-7
2-11-380
2A INTAKE COOLING WATER PUMP STRAINER
s.
Technical Specification
Compliance (Units 1 and 2)
During this reporting interval,
the inspectors
verified compliance with.
limiting conditions
for operations
(LCOs)
and
results
of -selected
surveillance
tests. 'hese
verifications
were
accomplished
by direct
observation
of monitoring
instrumentation,
valve
positions,
switch
positions,
and
review of completed
logs
and records.
The licensee's
compliance
with
LCO action
statements
were
reviewed
on selected
occur-'ences
as they happened.
Maintenance
Observation
Station
maintenance
activities of se'lected
safety-related
systems
and
components
were observed/reviewed
to ascertain that they were conducted
in
'accordance
with requirements.
The following items were considered
during
.
this review; limiting conditions for operations
were met, activities were
accomplished
using
approved
procedures,
functional tests
and/or calibra-
tions
were performed prior to returning components
or systems to service;
quality control
records
were maintained;
activities were accomplished
by
qualified personnel;
parts
and materials
used were properly certified; and
radiological controls
were
implemented
as
required.
Work requests
were
reviewed
to determine
status
of outstanding
jobs
and to assure
the
priority was
assigned
to safety-related
equipment.
The
inspectors
observed portions of the following maintenance activities:
Unit 1
PWO
0830
PWO
1789
PWO
2000
1B FIRE PUMP--REPAIR
PM--1A CHARGING PUMP ACCUMULATOR
PM--1B AUXILIARYFEEOWATER
PUMP
Unit 2
PWO 6689
QUARTERLY CALIBRATION--EXCORE NEUTRON FLUX MONITOR
Review of Nonroutine Events
Reported
by the Licensee
(Units
1 and 2)
The following Licensee
Event
Reports
(LERs) were
reviewed for potential
generic
impact,
to detect
trends,
and to determine
whether 'corrective
actions
appeared
appropriate.
Events which were reported
immediately were
also
reviewed
as
they occured to determine that technical specifications
were
being
met
and that
the public health
and safety
were of upmost
consideration.
The following LERs are considered
closed:
Unit 1
LER 87-15
dated
November 16,
1987.
This
LER describes
an event
which
occured
on October 14,
1987,
whereby Unit 1 operators
violated Technical
Specification
(TS)
3. 0.4
by entering
Mode 4 from
Mode 5 without the
requirements
of TS 3.6.6.2,
Shield Building Integrity, being met.
Several
administrative failures occurred which are not in keeping with the
usual
standards
of the
St.
Lucie's operations
staff and appear
to
be
indicative of a recent
trend toward laxity in attention to detail.
-The
sequence
of events
went thusly:
On October 13, St.
Lucie 1 was in Mode
5
preparing
to enter
Mode 4.
The
Mode change
requires
completion of a
Pre-startup
Checkoff List,
Step
8.3.11 of which
has
a sign-off for
completion of Data
Sheet ¹3,
Containment
and Shield Building Integrity.
Early
on October 14,
the
operators
completed
Data Sheet ¹3 (or it is
assumed
so)
and signed off Step 8.3.11.
Later that
same
day, after
a
shift
change
and during
review of the Pre-start
Checkoff List,
the
completed
copy of Data
Sheet
¹3 could not be
found.
(First example of
inattention
to detail).
The Assistant
Nuclear Plant Supervisor
(ANPS)
directed that another
Data Sheet ¹3 be completed.
A non-licensed
operator
completed
Data Sheet ¹3, with one exception;
he
found the
West Shield Building access
door open,
and so, did not initial
the sign-off space.
The operator
turned the data
sheet
in without the
sign-off and with no explanatory
note
nor any discussion
with the
ANPS
(second
example of inattention to detail).
The
ANPS reviewed the data sheet
and did not notice the unsigned
space for
the
West Shield Building door (third example of inattention to detail).
At 1521
on October 14, Unit 1 entered
Mode 4.
At 2355, while attempting
to perform
a monthly surveillance
on the shield building ventilation
system,
the West Shield Building door was found open.
This is a violation
of Unit 1 Technical Specification
3. 0.4 (50-335/87-24-01).
Several
opportunities
for detection
existed
which could
have prevented
this
occurrence,
but were
missed
through
a lack of thoroughness
in
performing/reviewing
operations.
Other
examples
of this over the past
several
months
which
may indicate
a trend
are (a) loss of component,
cooling
water train
independence
for several
days
due to
improper
implementation of and recovery
from an equipment clearance
(ref. inspec-
tion report
50-335/87-14),
(b) electrical
misalignment
of condensate
pumps,
causing
a reactor trip (ref. inspection report 50-335/87-21),
(c)
misalignment of fuel handling building ventilation (ref. inspection report
50-335/87-10),
and
(d)
improper rigging during lifting of the incore
instrument plate,
causing
damage
to the plate (ref. inspection report
50-389/87-20).
Unit 2
LER 87-16 -- reactor trip due to loss of condensate
pump due to inadequate
procedure (ref. inspection report 50-335/87-21).
Other plant
events
occurred
during the
inspection
period
which will,
generate
LER's.
On Wednesday,
November 25, with Unit 2 at 50X power for
physics testing following the refueling outage,
the reactor tripped due to
a generator
lockout and turbine trip.
The generator
lockout was caused
by
the
Permanent
Magnet Generator
(PMG) going to ground,
which was caused
by
the ¹9 turbine
generator
bearing failing.
All reactor safety
systems
5
performed
normally.
On Saturday,
November 28, while preparing to return
Unit 2 to power following the
PMG repairs,
a fire was discovered
on the
2Al Reactor
Coolant
Pump
(RCP) at
10: 10 a.m.
At 10:23
a.m.
an unusual
event
was
declared
and the
necessary
notifications were
made.
The fire
team
was
immediately mobilized
and all flames were extinguished
by 10:30
a.m.
All affected
was
removed
and
the
unusual
event
was
terminated
at
12: 20
p. m., approximately
two hours after declaration.
The
fire was
caused
by oil which had dripped onto a
RCP support lug.
The oil
source
was
found to be
a loose
packing nut on
an isolation valve for a
local
pressure
indicator at
the discharge
of the
RCP oil lift pumps.
Further investigation
also revealed
a hole in a oil collection pan which
had
been installed for fire prevention
purposes.
The necessary
repairs
and testing
were performed,
the other RCP's
were inspected,
and the unit
was returned to power on Wednesday,
December
2.
Physical
Protection (Units 1 and 2)
The inspectors verified by observation
and interviews during the reporting
interval
that
measures
taken
to assure
the physical
protection of the
facility met current requirements.
Areas inspected
included the organiza-
tion of the security force,
the establishment
and
mainte'nance
of gates,
doors
and isolation
zones
in the proper conditions,
that access
control
and badging
was proper,
and procedures
were followed.
Surveillance
Observations
During the inspection period, the inspectors verified plant operations
in
compliance
with selected
Technical
Specifications
(TS)
requirements.
Typical of these
were confirmation of compliance with the
TS for reactor
coolant
chemistry,
refueling water tank,
containment
pressure,
control
room ventilation
and
and
DC electrical
sources.
The
inspectors
verified that
testing
was
performed
in
accordance
with
adequate
procedures,
test
instrumentation
was calibrated,
limiting conditions for
operations
were met,
removal
and restoration of affected
components
were
accomplished,
test results
met requirements
and were reviewed by personnel
other that
the individual directing the test,
and that any deficiencies
identified during
the testing
were properly
reviewed
and resolved
by
appropriate
management
personnel.
The inspectors
observed
the following
surveillance
(s):
Unit 1
1-0030151
1-0120026
1-1120050
REMOTE
SHUTDOWN
MONITORING
INSTRUMENTATION PERIODIC
CHANNEL CHECK
REACTIVITY--DEVIATIONFROM DESIGN
AREA RADIATION SYSTEM PERIODIC TEST
Unit 2
2-0410050
HPSI/LPSI
PERIODIC TEST
2-0420050
AND IODINE REMOVAL SYSTEM PERIODIC
TEST