ML20150F008: 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 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:..             . . .     .               .-                   .   .                       . - _ . .   .         .
{{#Wiki_filter:..
                      '
. . .
        . .         . .
.
          , , .       .-
.-
        :t   .
.
                  *                                                                                                     >
.
                  %     >
. - _ .
                    '
.
                                                                          APPENDIX B
.
.
'
. .
. .
, , .
.-
:t
.
*
>
%
>
'
APPENDIX B
U. S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION
4
4
                ,                                         U. S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION
,
                                                                                                                                '
'
              >,
REGION IV
                                                                          REGION IV                              ,
1
      1
>,
                                                                                                                                '
,
                                  NRC Inspection Report:       50-267/88-03                 License: DPR-34         -
'
        .
.
                                  Docket:   50-267.
NRC Inspection Report:
                                  Licensee:   Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC)
50-267/88-03
                                  Facility Name:   Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station
License:
                                                    Fort St. Vrain (FSV) Nuclear Generating Station, Platteville.
DPR-34
                                                                      ~
-
                                  Inspection At:                                                                                .
Docket:
                                                        Colorado                                                                I
50-267.
                                                                                                                                t
Licensee:
                                  Inspection Conducted:     February 1-29, 1988                                                 ;
Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC)
                                                                        /f                           )~8O8
Facility Name:
                                                                                                                                i
Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station
                                  Inspectors:             [
Inspection At:
                                                  R. E. Farrell,"Senior Resident Inspector (SRI)     Date
Fort St. Vrain (FSV) Nuclear Generating Station, Platteville.
.
~
Colorado
I
t
Inspection Conducted:
February 1-29, 1988
;
/f
i
Inspectors:
[
)~8O8
R. E. Farrell,"Senior Resident Inspector (SRI)
Date
Y(A/r
3*/79
,
F. W. Michaud, Rbsident Inspector (RI)
Date
!
'
d
3/2b
Approved:
}
tt)
e
T.'F. Westerman, Chief
D6te'
Reactor Projects Section B
'
'
                                                    Y(A/r
                                                  F. W. Michaud, Rbsident Inspector (RI)
                                                                                                      3*/79
                                                                                                      Date
                                                                                                                          ,
                                                                                                                                !
                                  Approved:      }          tt)    e d                                3/2b
                                                                                                      D6te'
                                                  T.'F. Westerman, Chief
                                                    Reactor Projects Section B
    '
;
;
!
!
Line 66: Line 101:
W
W
W
W
  ,
,
t '
t '
                                                                                                                            i
i
            8804040236 890331
8804040236 890331
            PDR               ADOCK 05000267
PDR
            0                             DCD
ADOCK 05000267
0
DCD
_


  _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
              . .                       .
. .
                            .         .
.
                                                                                  2
.
                                          Inspection Summary
.
                                          Inspection Conducted February 1-29,1988 (Report 50-267/88-03)
2
                                          Areas Inspected:   Routine, unannounced inspection of folicwup of licensee
Inspection Summary
                                          action on previously identified findi;.gs, operational safety verification,
Inspection Conducted February 1-29,1988 (Report 50-267/88-03)
                                          followup of unusual event, engineered safety features walkdown, monthly
Areas Inspected:
                                          surveillance observation, monthly maintenance observation, radiological
Routine, unannounced inspection of folicwup of licensee
                                          protection, and physical security observation.
action on previously identified findi;.gs, operational safety verification,
                                          Results: Within the eight areas inspected, one violation was identified (the
followup of unusual event, engineered safety features walkdown, monthly
                                          failure to implement and follow procedures for maintenance and operations
surveillance observation, monthly maintenance observation, radiological
                                          activities, paragraph 4).
protection, and physical security observation.
Results: Within the eight areas inspected, one violation was identified (the
failure to implement and follow procedures for maintenance and operations
activities, paragraph 4).
l
l
!
!
Line 97: Line 138:
l
l


  ._--____ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _                                                         _
._--____ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
  '.              .
_
                                                '
'.
                                                              .
'
            .                                       .
.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            3
.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  DETAILS
.
                                                                                1.                                   Persons Contacted
.
                                                                                                                      FSV
3
                                                                                                              *L. Brey, Manager, Nuclear Licensing and Fuels
DETAILS
                                                                                                              "M. Ferris, Manager, Quality Assurance (QA) Operations
1.
                                                                                                              *C. Fuller, Manager, Nuclear Production
Persons Contacted
                                                                                                              *M. Holmes, Manager, Nuclear Licensing
FSV
*L. Brey, Manager, Nuclear Licensing and Fuels
"M. Ferris, Manager, Quality Assurance (QA) Operations
*C. Fuller, Manager, Nuclear Production
*M. Holmes, Manager, Nuclear Licensing
;
;
                                                                                                              *F. Novachek, Manager. Technical / Administrative Services
*F. Novachek, Manager. Technical / Administrative Services
                                                                                                              *P. Tomlinson, Manager, QA                                                                                                                 ,
*P. Tomlinson, Manager, QA
                                                                                                              *D. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering
,
                                                                                                              *R. Williams Jr. , Vice President, Nuclear Operations
*D. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering
                                                                                                              *J. Reesy, Staff Assistant, Nuclear Engineering
*R. Williams Jr. , Vice President, Nuclear Operations
,                                                                                                            *F. Borst, Nuclear Training Manager
*J. Reesy, Staff Assistant, Nuclear Engineering
                                                                                                              *M. Deniston, Shift Supervisor
*F. Borst, Nuclear Training Manager
                                                                                                              *S. Hofsetter, Nuclear Licensing
                                                                                                              *M. Block, Superirtendent, Nuclear Betterment                                                                                              l
                                                                                                              *L. Scott, Manager, QA Service
                                                                                                              *R. Sargent, Assistant to Vice President, Nuclear Operai1ons
                                                                                                              *R. Webb, Maintenance Supervisor
,
,
                                                                                                                    The NRC inspectors also contacted other licensee and contractor personnel
*M.
                                                                                                                    during the inspection.
Deniston, Shift Supervisor
                                                                                                                      * Denotes those attending the exit interview conducted March 8, 1988.
*S. Hofsetter, Nuclear Licensing
*M. Block, Superirtendent, Nuclear Betterment
l
*L. Scott, Manager, QA Service
*R. Sargent, Assistant to Vice President, Nuclear Operai1ons
*R. Webb, Maintenance Supervisor
The NRC inspectors also contacted other licensee and contractor personnel
,
during the inspection.
* Denotes those attending the exit interview conducted March 8, 1988.
!
!
                                                                              2.                                     Followup of Licensee Action on Previously Identified Findings
2.
                                                                                                                      (Closed) Open Item 267/8507-06: Shorten Time Between Change Notice (CN)
Followup of Licensee Action on Previously Identified Findings
                                                                                                                      Issue And Notation On Drawing - In some cases, a caution that changes had
(Closed) Open Item 267/8507-06: Shorten Time Between Change Notice (CN)
.                                                                                                                    been made under a CN was not reflected on the affected drawings for 30
Issue And Notation On Drawing - In some cases, a caution that changes had
                                                                                                                    days or more af ter a CN was issued. This presented a concern that a
been made under a CN was not reflected on the affected drawings for 30
                                                                                                                    modified system or component could be in service for that amount of time
.
                                                                                                                    without adequate drawings. By utilizing a computerized document update
days or more af ter a CN was issued.
                                                                                                                      information system, the licensee has shortened the time involved to mark
This presented a concern that a
                                                                                                                    all affected drawings to approximately 1 week, with the drawings in the
modified system or component could be in service for that amount of time
2                                                                                                                    control room, shif t supervisor's of fice, and records center updated the
without adequate drawings.
                                                                                                                      same day a CN issue notification is received. The NRC inspector verified
By utilizing a computerized document update
information system, the licensee has shortened the time involved to mark
all affected drawings to approximately 1 week, with the drawings in the
control room, shif t supervisor's of fice, and records center updated the
2
same day a CN issue notification is received. The NRC inspector verified
these activities are taking place by direct observations and a review of
'
'
                                                                                                                      these activities are taking place by direct observations and a review of
;
;                                                                                                                    documentation. This item is closed.
documentation.
                                                                                                                      (Closed) Open Item 267/8507-07: Devcon Epoxy Only Qualified to 200 F.
This item is closed.
                                                                                                                      Epoxy used to attach thermocouples to control rod drive assemblies was
(Closed) Open Item 267/8507-07: Devcon Epoxy Only Qualified to 200 F.
                                                                                                                      qualified to enly 200*F, while actual operating temperatures can exceed
Epoxy used to attach thermocouples to control rod drive assemblies was
                                                                                                                      200 F. Two tests were performed by the licensee to establish this
qualified to enly 200*F, while actual operating temperatures can exceed
                                                                                                                      adhesive's acceptability. One test performed under Fuel Handling
200 F.
                                                                                                                      Procedure 100-31 involved a visual examination and measurement of force
Two tests were performed by the licensee to establish this
adhesive's acceptability.
One test performed under Fuel Handling
Procedure 100-31 involved a visual examination and measurement of force
,
,
  ,e, , ,                     e                                         +,,_mmr.n.,rs.                                                                                   -r,       ,-g       ~ a,---., -----.,--w.m..---,,, e,-e s---,ww,w<- - - , -
,e, , ,
e
+,,_mmr.n.,rs.
-r,
,-g
~
a,---.,
-----.,--w.m..---,,,
e,-e
s---,ww,w<-
- - , -


                                          __
__
      *
*
  ..     .
..
    .   .
.
                                                    4
.
              required to remove the epoxy from a CRD element, which had been subjected
.
l             to varying power operating conditions in the reactor core between 1979 and
4
l              1984. The second test, T-288, involved subjecting epoxy to greater than
required to remove the epoxy from a CRD element, which had been subjected
1             300 F temperature and then performing a pull test to verify that
l
              thermocouples remained sufficiantly attached. Based on these tests, the
to varying power operating conditions in the reactor core between 1979 and
1984.
The second test, T-288, involved subjecting epoxy to greater than
l
1
300 F temperature and then performing a pull test to verify that
thermocouples remained sufficiantly attached. Based on these tests, the
licensee concluded the Devcon ep;xy was acceptable for use in applications
,
,
              licensee concluded the Devcon ep;xy was acceptable for use in applications
up to 300 F.
The NRC resident inspectors reviewed the licensee's tests
'
'
              up to 300 F. The NRC resident inspectors reviewed the licensee's tests
and evaluation and found them acceptable.
              and evaluation and found them acceptable.       This item is closed.
This item is closed.
            3. Operational Safety Verification
3.
              The NRC resident inspectors reviewed licensee activities to ascertain that
Operational Safety Verification
              the facility is being operated safely and in conformance with regulatory
The NRC resident inspectors reviewed licensee activities to ascertain that
              requirements and that the licensee's management control system is
the facility is being operated safely and in conformance with regulatory
              ef fectively discharging its responsibilities for continued safe operation.
requirements and that the licensee's management control system is
              The NRC resident inspectors toured the control room on a daily basis
ef fectively discharging its responsibilities for continued safe operation.
              during normal working hours and at least weekly during backshif t hours.
The NRC resident inspectors toured the control room on a daily basis
              The reactor operator and shif t supervisor logs and Technical Specification
during normal working hours and at least weekly during backshif t hours.
              compliance logs were reviewed daily. The NRC resident inspectors observed
The reactor operator and shif t supervisor logs and Technical Specification
              proper control room staffing at all times and verified operators were
compliance logs were reviewed daily. The NRC resident inspectors observed
              attentive and adhered to approved procedures. Control room
proper control room staffing at all times and verified operators were
                instrumentation was observed by the NRC inspectors and the operability of
attentive and adhered to approved procedures.
              the plant protective system and nuclear instrumentation system were
Control room
              verified by the NRC resident inspectors on each control room tour.
instrumentation was observed by the NRC inspectors and the operability of
              Operator awareness and understanding of abnormal or alarm conditions were
the plant protective system and nuclear instrumentation system were
              also verified.   The NRC resident inspectors revieved the operations order
verified by the NRC resident inspectors on each control room tour.
              book, operations deviution report (0DR) log, clearance log, and temporary
Operator awareness and understanding of abnormal or alarm conditions were
              configuration report (TCR) log to note any out-of-service safety-related
also verified.
                systems and to verify compliance with Technical Specification
The NRC resident inspectors revieved the operations order
                requirements.
book, operations deviution report (0DR) log, clearance log, and temporary
              The licensee's station manager and superintendent of operations were
configuration report (TCR) log to note any out-of-service safety-related
              observed in the control room on a daily basis, with the superintendent of
systems and to verify compliance with Technical Specification
              operations frequently in the control room during the day and during
requirements.
                special tests or evolutions.
The licensee's station manager and superintendent of operations were
                The NRC resident inspectors verified the operability of a safety-related
observed in the control room on a daily basis, with the superintendent of
                system on a weekly basis.   The PCRV overpressure protection system,
operations frequently in the control room during the day and during
                120 VAC vital power distribution system, reactor plant cooling water
special tests or evolutions.
                system, and firewater system were verified operable by the NRC resident
The NRC resident inspectors verified the operability of a safety-related
                inspectors during this report period.     During plant tours, particular
system on a weekly basis.
                attention was paid to components of these systems to verify valve
The PCRV overpressure protection system,
                positions, power supplies, and inst umentation were correct for current
120 VAC vital power distribution system, reactor plant cooling water
                plant conditions.   General plant condition and housekeeping were
system, and firewater system were verified operable by the NRC resident
                acceptable.
inspectors during this report period.
                Shift turnovers were observed at least weekly by the NRC resident
During plant tours, particular
                inspectors. The information flow appeared to be good, with the shift
attention was paid to components of these systems to verify valve
                                                                                          l
positions, power supplies, and inst umentation were correct for current
                                                                                          l
plant conditions.
                                                                                          l
General plant condition and housekeeping were
                                                                                          ;
acceptable.
Shift turnovers were observed at least weekly by the NRC resident
inspectors. The information flow appeared to be good, with the shift
l
l
l
;


                        -         . - .   .-       .
-
  '
. - .
..     ..
.-
.   .
.
                                                      5
'
            supervisors routinely soliciting comments' or concerns from reactor
..
            operators, equipment operators, and auxiliary tenders.
..
            No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
.
            area.
.
          4. Followup of Unusual Event
5
            On February 10, 1988, at 3:47 p.m. (MST), "A" helium circulator tripped
supervisors routinely soliciting comments' or concerns from reactor
            due to a low speed signal with the reactor at 75 percent power. The
operators, equipment operators, and auxiliary tenders.
            circulator trip resulted in a reactor runback to between 50 percent to
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
            60 percent reactor power and then reactor power was further reduced by the
area.
            plant operators to 25 percent power. While attempting to balance
4.
            feedwater between Loop 1 and Loop 2, an upset in the helium circulator
Followup of Unusual Event
            auxiliaries supplied by feedwater resulted in the tripping of "B"       and "D"
On February 10, 1988, at 3:47 p.m. (MST), "A" helium circulator tripped
            helium circuiators at 4:07 p.m. (MST).
due to a low speed signal with the reactor at 75 percent power.
            The tripping of two circulators (A & B) in one loop r.;ulted in a loop
The
            shutdown (ESF actuation).       The reactor operators manually scrammed the
circulator trip resulted in a reactor runback to between 50 percent to
            reactor from 25 percent power with only one helium circulator running.
60 percent reactor power and then reactor power was further reduced by the
            At 6:40 p.m. (MST), the licensee identified that an unplanned release was
plant operators to 25 percent power. While attempting to balance
            occurring and an unusual event was declared. An operator had been
feedwater between Loop 1 and Loop 2, an upset in the helium circulator
            dispatched to vent the surge tank associated with the liner cooling water
auxiliaries supplied by feedwater resulted in the tripping of "B"
            system. The licensed operator dispatched to perform this function
and "D"
            inadvertently opened the wrong valve venting the tank to the plant stack
helium circuiators at 4:07 p.m. (MST).
            rather than to the gaseous radwaste system. The total release over
The tripping of two circulators (A & B) in one loop r.;ulted in a loop
            approximately 200 minutes was small. (4.26 X 105 microcuries of noble gas
shutdown (ESF actuation).
            activity)
The reactor operators manually scrammed the
            The plant maintained forced circulation cooling at all timas.       The SRI
reactor from 25 percent power with only one helium circulator running.
            responded to the event and was onsite all night. The Colorado Department
At 6:40 p.m. (MST), the licensee identified that an unplanned release was
            of Health was in contact with the site and was briefed by the licensee as
occurring and an unusual event was declared.
            well as the SRI.
An operator had been
            The licensee has subsequently determined that the "A" helium circulator
dispatched to vent the surge tank associated with the liner cooling water
            trip occurred due to an apparent interchange of speed indication signal
system.
            cables during a recent equipment calibration. The trip occurred when the
The licensed operator dispatched to perform this function
            "B" helium circulator was placed in manual control for calibration.
inadvertently opened the wrong valve venting the tank to the plant stack
            a.   Background
rather than to the gaseous radwaste system.
                  The unusual event of February 10, 1988, and associated unplanned
The total release over
                  release started with the trip of helium circulator "A".
approximately 200 minutes was small.
                  Helium circulator speed cable daily calibration was in process when
(4.26 X 105 microcuries of noble gas
                  circulator "A"     tripped.
activity)
                  When a circulator's speed cables are calibrated, the circuiator is
The plant maintained forced circulation cooling at all timas.
                  taken from auto to manual control to minimize the chances of a trip.
The SRI
                                                                                .
responded to the event and was onsite all night.
The Colorado Department
of Health was in contact with the site and was briefed by the licensee as
well as the SRI.
The licensee has subsequently determined that the
"A" helium circulator
trip occurred due to an apparent interchange of speed indication signal
cables during a recent equipment calibration.
The trip occurred when the
"B" helium circulator was placed in manual control for calibration.
a.
Background
The unusual event of February 10, 1988, and associated unplanned
release started with the trip of helium circulator "A".
Helium circulator speed cable daily calibration was in process when
circulator "A"
tripped.
When a circulator's speed cables are calibrated, the circuiator is
taken from auto to manual control to minimize the chances of a trip.
.


        _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_ _ _ _ _ _ .
  .
.
      .
.
    .                 .
.
                                                                      6
.
                                        Helium circulator "A" speed cables had been successfully calibrated
6
                                        and circulator "A" returned to auto control. Helium circulator "B"
Helium circulator "A" speed cables had been successfully calibrated
                                        was placed in manual control and calibration of the "B" circulator
and circulator
                                        speed cables was in process when circulator "A" tripped.
"A" returned to auto control.
                                        The licensee determined that on February 2, 1988, while calibrating
Helium circulator "B"
                                        the speed modules (SM) on circulator "A", SM 2109 could not be
was placed in manual control and calibration of the
                                        balanced while getting its signal from cable 18194.     The technician
"B" circulator
                                        decided to check if the problem was in SM-2109 or in the cable 18194.
speed cables was in process when circulator "A" tripped.
                                        The licensee suspected the speed problems were in the cables. Seven
The licensee determined that on February 2, 1988, while calibrating
                                        spare speed cables are available from each circulator's SM. The
the speed modules (SM) on circulator "A", SM 2109 could not be
                                        technician unplugged cable 18194 from SM 2109 and plugged in
balanced while getting its signal from cable 18194.
                                        cable 18133. With cable 18133 installed, SM-2109 balanced and was
The technician
                                        left in this configuration by the technician.     Cable 18133 does not
decided to check if the problem was in SM-2109 or in the cable 18194.
                                        sense circulator "A" speed but is a spare speed cable from the "B"
The licensee suspected the speed problems were in the cables.
                                        circulator,
Seven
                          b.           Design Information
spare speed cables are available from each circulator's SM.
                                        There are two speed indications from each circulator:     a steam
The
                                        turbine speed indication and a water turbine speed indication. The
technician unplugged cable 18194 from SM 2109 and plugged in
                                        water turbine speed indicator is much easier to read than the steam
cable 18133.
                                        indicator and generally the one the operators use.     Since both drives
With cable 18133 installed, SM-2109 balanced and was
                                        are on a common shaft, the speed should be the same regardless of
left in this configuration by the technician.
                                        which turbine is driving the circulator.
Cable 18133 does not
                                        There are 12 speed cables coming from the speed modules of each
sense circulator "A" speed but is a spare speed cable from the "B"
                                        helium circulator. Four of these cables are utilized for speed
circulator,
                                        control. One cable for steam turbine speed, one cable for water
b.
                                        turbine speed, and two spares.
Design Information
                                        Eight cables from each circulator are dedicated to the plant
There are two speed indications from each circulator:
                                        protection system (PPS).   Three of these cables are used at one time
a steam
                                        (one for each logic channel). Five cables are dedicated spares.
turbine speed indication and a water turbine speed indication. The
                          c.           Speed Control
water turbine speed indicator is much easier to read than the steam
                                        The speed control circuitry looks at the water turbine indicated
indicator and generally the one the operators use.
                                        speed and the steam turbine indicated speed and controls from the
Since both drives
                                        higher of the two indicated speeds (no difference if everything
are on a common shaft, the speed should be the same regardless of
                                        working correctly).
which turbine is driving the circulator.
                                        As long as the "B" circulator speed was less than or equal to the "A"
There are 12 speed cables coming from the speed modules of each
helium circulator.
Four of these cables are utilized for speed
control.
One cable for steam turbine speed, one cable for water
turbine speed, and two spares.
Eight cables from each circulator are dedicated to the plant
protection system (PPS).
Three of these cables are used at one time
(one for each logic channel).
Five cables are dedicated spares.
c.
Speed Control
The speed control circuitry looks at the water turbine indicated
speed and the steam turbine indicated speed and controls from the
higher of the two indicated speeds (no difference if everything
working correctly).
As long as the "B" circulator speed was less than or equal to the "A"
circulator speed, the control system saw no problem and chose the "A"
,
,
                                        circulator speed, the control system saw no problem and chose the "A"
!
!
                                        circulator steam turbine speed to control circulator "A" With
circulator steam turbine speed to control circulator
l                                       cable 18133 (a "B" circulator speed cable) controlling SM-2109 (the
"A"
                                        "A" circulator water turbine SM) the problem arose during calibration
With
                                        of "B" circulator speed when the "A" circulator was in auto control
l
                                        and the "B" circulator speed exceeded the "A" circulator speed,
cable 18133 (a "B" circulator speed cable) controlling SM-2109 (the
"A" circulator water turbine SM) the problem arose during calibration
of "B"
circulator speed when the "A" circulator was in auto control
and the "B" circulator speed exceeded the
"A"
circulator speed,
l
l
1
1
                        --   - _ - _ .   . - . .-.
--
- _ - _ .
. - .
.-.


                                      .
.
                                                          .     .
.
                                                                                _-       _ _ _ _ __
.
                        .
.
        . '.
_-
      .    .
_ _ _ _ __
                                                  7
'.
                  .When this happened, the control circuit for "A" circulator, selecting
.
                  the higher speed indication, selected the "A" circulator water
.
                  turbine speed. -This was actually the "B" circulator speed, since a
.
                  "B" cable was feeding this speed module. This falsely told the
7
                  control circuit that the "A" circulator was running faster than the
.When this happened, the control circuit for "A" circulator, selecting
                  control circuit required, so the control circuit began closing the
the higher speed indication, selected the "A" circulator water
                  "A" circulator steam speed valve.
turbine speed. -This was actually the "B"
                  Since the control circuit was actually reading "B" circulator speed
circulator speed, since a
                  it saw no change in the "A" circulator speed indication and continued
"B" cable was feeding this speed module.
                  to close down the "A" circulator speed valve. When the "A"
This falsely told the
                  circulator reached the low setpoint of the circulator
control circuit that the "A" circulator was running faster than the
                  speed-to-feedwater flow program, which forces a limit on primary to
control circuit required, so the control circuit began closing the
                  secondary flow ratio, the the PPS which was correctly reading
"A" circulator steam speed valve.
                  circulator "A" speed tripped the circulator.
Since the control circuit was actually reading "B" circulator speed
              d. Findings
it saw no change in the
                  The technician calibrating the SM was utilizing licensee
"A" circulator speed indication and continued
                  Procedure SR-RE-17-W, Issue 10, "Circulator Speed Modifier Weekly
to close down the "A" circulator speed valve. When the
                  Check."
"A"
                  The procedure did not address cable termination.
circulator reached the low setpoint of the circulator
                  When the technician removed the installed cable (18133) he was no
speed-to-feedwater flow program, which forces a limit on primary to
                    longer performing surveillance activities, but was performing
secondary flow ratio, the the PPS which was correctly reading
                  maintenance activities. Maintenance activities are governed by the
circulator "A" speed tripped the circulator.
                    licensee's Administrative Prosedure P-7, Issue 12, "Station Service
d.
                  Request Processing." Procedure P-7 as modified by Procedure
Findings
                  Deviation Request 88-0006, dated January 13, 1988, specifically
The technician calibrating the SM was utilizing licensee
                    states, in Section 2.0, that the procedure applies to corrective and
Procedure SR-RE-17-W, Issue 10, "Circulator Speed Modifier Weekly
                    preventative maintenance and not to calibration activities.
Check."
                    Procedure P-7 is the licensee's procedure for controlling maintenance
The procedure did not address cable termination.
                    activities.   Procedure P-7 requires initiation of a Station Service
When the technician removed the installed cable (18133) he was no
                    Request to authorize, document, and control maintenance activities.
longer performing surveillance activities, but was performing
                    Failure to follow Procedure P-7 is an apparent violation of NRC
maintenance activities.
                    regulations (267/8803-01).
Maintenance activities are governed by the
                    The operator venting reactor plant cooling water system surge tanks
licensee's Administrative Prosedure P-7, Issue 12, "Station Service
                    was guided by System Operating procedure (SOP) 46, Issue 39, "Reactor
Request Processing." Procedure P-7 as modified by Procedure
                    Plant Cooling Water System." SOP-46 in Step 3.7, "Venting the Vapor
Deviation Request 88-0006, dated January 13, 1988, specifically
                    Space in T-4601 or (T-4602)," details the steps for venting the
states, in Section 2.0, that the procedure applies to corrective and
                    reactor plant cooling water surge tank vapor space to the gas waste
preventative maintenance and not to calibration activities.
                    system. The steps call for first opening V-4653 for Surge
Procedure P-7 is the licensee's procedure for controlling maintenance
                    Tank T-4601 (V-4654 for Surge Tank T-4602). Then the operator is to
activities.
                    open V-461691 for Surge Tank T-4601 (V-461692 for Surge Tank T-4602).
Procedure P-7 requires initiation of a Station Service
                    Opening these two valves for each surge tank vents the vapor space of
Request to authorize, document, and control maintenance activities.
                    each tank to a common line leading to the gas waste system. When
Failure to follow Procedure P-7 is an apparent violation of NRC
                    these steps are completed, the operator opens Valve V-46193, which
regulations (267/8803-01).
The operator venting reactor plant cooling water system surge tanks
was guided by System Operating procedure (SOP) 46, Issue 39, "Reactor
Plant Cooling Water System." SOP-46 in Step 3.7, "Venting the Vapor
Space in T-4601 or (T-4602)," details the steps for venting the
reactor plant cooling water surge tank vapor space to the gas waste
system.
The steps call for first opening V-4653 for Surge
Tank T-4601 (V-4654 for Surge Tank T-4602).
Then the operator is to
open V-461691 for Surge Tank T-4601 (V-461692 for Surge Tank T-4602).
Opening these two valves for each surge tank vents the vapor space of
each tank to a common line leading to the gas waste system. When
these steps are completed, the operator opens Valve V-46193, which
. . . . . .
. . . . . .


                                                        -____     _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
-____
  . '.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
.   .
.
                                              8
'.
              opens the common line from the two surge tanks to the gas waste
.
                system relieving the pressure in the , urge tanks.
.
              All of the valves mentioned in the preceding paragraph are manual
8
                valves. Adjacent to the valves, V-461691 on Tank T-4601 and V-461692
opens the common line from the two surge tanks to the gas waste
                on Tank T-4602, are hand operated valves, V-461634P and k-461635P,
system relieving the pressure in the , urge tanks.
                respectively. Opening Valve V-461634P after opening Valve V-4653
All of the valves mentioned in the preceding paragraph are manual
                vents Surge Tank 1-4601 to the plant exhaust stack. Opening Valve
valves. Adjacent to the valves, V-461691 on Tank T-4601 and V-461692
                V-461635P af ter opening Valve V-4654 vents Surge Tank T-4602 to the
on Tank T-4602, are hand operated valves, V-461634P and k-461635P,
                plant exhaust tank.
respectively. Opening Valve V-461634P after opening Valve V-4653
                The valves are now clearly marked as to function. At the time of the
vents Surge Tank 1-4601 to the plant exhaust stack. Opening Valve
                incident, the valves were marked with small stamped metal tags
V-461635P af ter opening Valve V-4654 vents Surge Tank T-4602 to the
                identifying the valves by number.
plant exhaust tank.
                Procedure 50P-46 in Step 3.7 clearly listed the valves to be opened.
The valves are now clearly marked as to function.
                The valves were identified in the procedure by valve number
At the time of the
                corresponding to the valve numbers attached to the valves. The
incident, the valves were marked with small stamped metal tags
                operator opened either or both Valves V-461634P and V-461635P, rather
identifying the valves by number.
                than V-461691 and V-461592. This vented the gaseous content of
Procedure 50P-46 in Step 3.7 clearly listed the valves to be opened.
                Tanks T-4601 and/o" T-4602 to the plant stack resulting in an
The valves were identified in the procedure by valve number
                unplanned radioactive release. The failure to follow
corresponding to the valve numbers attached to the valves. The
                Procedure 50P-46 is second example of Violation (267/8803-01).
operator opened either or both Valves V-461634P and V-461635P, rather
      5. Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Walkdown
than V-461691 and V-461592. This vented the gaseous content of
          The NRC resident inspectors performed a walkdown of all accessible
Tanks T-4601 and/o" T-4602 to the plant stack resulting in an
          portions of the prestressed concrete reactor vessel (PCRV) overpressure
unplanned radioactive release.
          protection system to verify its operability.       Sections 4.3.6 and 6.8 of
The failure to follow
          the FSAR and Technical Specifications 3.2, 3.3, 4.2.7, and 5.2.1 were
Procedure 50P-46 is second example of Violation (267/8803-01).
          reviewed by the NRC resident inspectors to ensure familiarity with the
5.
          system and requirements. The as-found system configuration was compared
Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Walkdown
          with drawing PI-11-5 to check their agreement. Valve positions and
The NRC resident inspectors performed a walkdown of all accessible
          labeling were verified to be correct by the NRC resident inspectors,
portions of the prestressed concrete reactor vessel (PCRV) overpressure
          including the installation of lotking devices on valves where required.
protection system to verify its operability.
          All cortions of the system were physically inspected, w th the exception
Sections 4.3.6 and 6.8 of
          of the internals of the PCRV safety valve tank T-1101 which contains the
the FSAR and Technical Specifications 3.2, 3.3, 4.2.7, and 5.2.1 were
          relief valves and rupture discs. These components will be inspected
reviewed by the NRC resident inspectors to ensure familiarity with the
          during the next outage when T-1101 is opened. During this inspection,
system and requirements.
          attention was paid to equipment conditions, housekeeping, and any items
The as-found system configuration was compared
          which could degrade performance. The overall condition of this system was
with drawing PI-11-5 to check their agreement. Valve positions and
          considered good.
labeling were verified to be correct by the NRC resident inspectors,
          No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
including the installation of lotking devices on valves where required.
          area.
All cortions of the system were physically inspected, w th the exception
      6. Monthly Surveillance Observation
of the internals of the PCRV safety valve tank T-1101 which contains the
          The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's performance of
relief valves and rupture discs.
          selected surveillance activities as listed below. The surveillance
These components will be inspected
          procedures were reviewed for conformance with Technical Spe;ification
during the next outage when T-1101 is opened.
During this inspection,
attention was paid to equipment conditions, housekeeping, and any items
which could degrade performance.
The overall condition of this system was
considered good.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
area.
6.
Monthly Surveillance Observation
The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's performance of
selected surveillance activities as listed below. The surveillance
procedures were reviewed for conformance with Technical Spe;ification


    .   .
.
  o   .
.
                                                  9
o
            requirements and to ensure they had been properly reviewed and approved
.
            prior to commencing any tests. The NRC resident inspectors witnessed
9
            portions of the preparations, conduct, and v/ stem restoration for each of
requirements and to ensure they had been properly reviewed and approved
            these surveillance tests. Test results were independently reviewed by the
prior to commencing any tests.
            NRC resident inspectors to ensure they met applicable Technical
The NRC resident inspectors witnessed
            Specification requirements. Surveillance activities observed during this
portions of the preparations, conduct, and v/ stem restoration for each of
            reporting period included:
these surveillance tests.
                  SR 5.4.1.1.8.b-M, "Reheat Steam Temperature Scram Test," performed on
Test results were independently reviewed by the
                  February 1,1988. This surveillance tests each hot reheat steam
NRC resident inspectors to ensure they met applicable Technical
                  temperature scram channel to verify alarms, actuations, and
Specification requirements.
                  indications.   The as-found values were measured and recorded,
Surveillance activities observed during this
                  acceptance values calculated and independently verified, and
reporting period included:
                  calibration of the bystable amplifiers and thermocouple amplifiers
SR 5.4.1.1.8.b-M, "Reheat Steam Temperature Scram Test," performed on
                  was checked at 600 F, 900 F, and 1200 F utilizing test signals.
February 1,1988.
                  These amplifiers were adjusted as required in accordance with this
This surveillance tests each hot reheat steam
                  procedure and the as-left values were recorded.     No discrepancies
temperature scram channel to verify alarms, actuations, and
                  were noted.
indications.
                  SR 5.10.8-M, "Monthly Check of Fire Hose Stations," performed on
The as-found values were measured and recorded,
                  February 2, 1988. This surveillance verified the condition of each
acceptance values calculated and independently verified, and
                  fire hose station in the reactor and turbine buildings, and was
calibration of the bystable amplifiers and thermocouple amplifiers
                  independently versfied by the NRC resident inspectors.     Each
was checked at 600 F, 900 F, and 1200 F utilizing test signals.
                  station's hose valve was verified shut and not leaking, hoses and
These amplifiers were adjusted as required in accordance with this
                  nozzles properly connected, and general equipment conditions
procedure and the as-left values were recorded.
                  observed.   No discrepancies were noted.
No discrepancies
                  E3R 8.1.lbc-M, "Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Systein Test," performed
were noted.
                  on February 25, 1988. This surveillance test verifies the operation
SR 5.10.8-M, "Monthly Check of Fire Hose Stations," performed on
                  of the gaseous waste release system automatic functions. Instruments
February 2, 1988.
                  which provide inputs to cause automatic isolation and ventilation
This surveillance verified the condition of each
                  system realignments were tripped using a test signal, then each
fire hose station in the reactor and turbine buildings, and was
                  associated damper or valve which was repositioned by the automatic
independently versfied by the NRC resident inspectors.
                  signal was verified to be in its proper position.     The instruments
Each
                  and equipment were then restored to their normal lineup. No
station's hose valve was verified shut and not leaking, hoses and
                  discrepancies were noted.
nozzles properly connected, and general equipment conditions
            No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
observed.
            area.
No discrepancies were noted.
          7. Monthly Maintenance Observation
E3R 8.1.lbc-M, "Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Systein Test," performed
            On February 4,1988, the licensee noticed the pressure in the emergency
on February 25, 1988.
            feedwater supply to the Loop 1 helium circulator Pelton wheel drives was
This surveillance test verifies the operation
            equal to the feedwater header pressure (approximately 3000 psia). This
of the gaseous waste release system automatic functions.
Instruments
which provide inputs to cause automatic isolation and ventilation
system realignments were tripped using a test signal, then each
associated damper or valve which was repositioned by the automatic
signal was verified to be in its proper position.
The instruments
and equipment were then restored to their normal lineup.
No
discrepancies were noted.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
area.
7.
Monthly Maintenance Observation
On February 4,1988, the licensee noticed the pressure in the emergency
feedwater supply to the Loop 1 helium circulator Pelton wheel drives was
equal to the feedwater header pressure (approximately 3000 psia).
This
condition indicated a problem with Pressure Control Valve PV-21243, which
:
:
            condition indicated a problem with Pressure Control Valve PV-21243, which
should reduce the pressure to approximately 1700 psi. The licensee took
'
'
            should reduce the pressure to approximately 1700 psi. The licensee took
the emergency feedwater header out of service at 5:57 a.m. (MST), on
            the emergency feedwater header out of service at 5:57 a.m. (MST), on
February 5, 1988, to perform repairs on PV-21243 and entered Technical
            February 5, 1988, to perform repairs on PV-21243 and entered Technical
Specification Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 4.0.3, since the
            Specification Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 4.0.3, since the
conditions of LCO 4.3.4, "Emergency Condensate and Emergency Feedwater
;
;
            conditions of LCO 4.3.4, "Emergency Condensate and Emergency Feedwater
i
i
i
i
i
i


                                                                  -       -                 _ _ _ _ _
-
          '
-
      .     .
_ _ _ _ _
    .   ..
'
                                                  10                                                 o
.
.
.
..
10
o
,
,
              Headers LCO," were no longer satistted-     LCO 4.0.3 requires the reactor to
Headers LCO," were no longer satistted-
              be ;hutdown in an orderly manner within a 24-hr Jr period. Also c' :icaale
LCO 4.0.3 requires the reactor to
              and providing a 24-hour grace period was LCO 4.2.2.a, "Operable C. culator               -
be ;hutdown in an orderly manner within a 24-hr Jr period. Also c' :icaale
              LCO." Repairs were made to valve PV-21243, which included replacement of
and providing a 24-hour grace period was LCO 4.2.2.a, "Operable C. culator
              the valve trim. The associated pressure controller, PIC-21243, was
-
              calibrated in accordance with Procedure RP-EQ-16, Issue 2, dated
LCO."
              October 15, 1986. The NRC resident inspectors observed the repairs and
Repairs were made to valve PV-21243, which included replacement of
              calibration, which were completed satisfactorily. No aiscrepancies were
the valve trim. The associated pressure controller, PIC-21243, was
              noted. The emergency feedwater header was retu ned to service at
calibrated in accordance with Procedure RP-EQ-16, Issue 2, dated
              1 a.m. (MST), on February 6, 1988, and LCO 4.0.3 and 4.2.2.a were formally
October 15, 1986.
              exited at 5:15 a.m. (MST), after allowing the system to run following its
The NRC resident inspectors observed the repairs and
              return to service.
calibration, which were completed satisfactorily.
              The NRC resident inspectors also followed the licensee's actions to
No aiscrepancies were
              correct the problems in the helium circu'ator speed cables. The
noted.
              circulator speed signals to both the indicators and the plant protective
The emergency feedwater header was retu ned to service at
              system had been exhibiting erratic behavior at the elevated temperatures
1 a.m. (MST), on February 6, 1988, and LCO 4.0.3 and 4.2.2.a were formally
              associated with operation at higher power levels. Troubleshooting
exited at 5:15 a.m. (MST), after allowing the system to run following its
              following the February 10, 1988, event, described in paragraph 4 of this
return to service.
              report, indicated a problem with the twinax cable "Cannon" connectors at
The NRC resident inspectors also followed the licensee's actions to
              the helium circulators. These special connectors have the male end
correct the problems in the helium circu'ator speed cables.
              attached to the circulator housing and the female end attached to the
The
              cables. These female pin connectors have a spring-like device which in
circulator speed signals to both the indicators and the plant protective
              some cases had relaxed, allowing a slight gap in the pin connection at the
system had been exhibiting erratic behavior at the elevated temperatures
              elevated temperatures. The connectors on each of the four helium
associated with operation at higher power levels.
              circulators were disassembled and both the nale ar.d fema'e pins were
Troubleshooting
              checked with a micrometer to ensure their size was within a tolerance of
following the February 10, 1988, event, described in paragraph 4 of this
              0.060 inch to 0.064 inch. A number of female pins were replaced, and the
report, indicated a problem with the twinax cable "Cannon" connectors at
              connectors reassembled. Since returning to power on February 12, 1988,
the helium circulators.
              the licensee has experienced no significant problems wish the helium
These special connectors have the male end
              circulator speed cables or the associated indications and protective
attached to the circulator housing and the female end attached to the
              circuitry.
cables.
  4
These female pin connectors have a spring-like device which in
              At 10:40 p.m. (MST), on February 25, 1988, the license 4 experienced a
some cases had relaxed, allowing a slight gap in the pin connection at the
                turbine trip from approximately 50 percent power due to a <=lse low main
elevated temperatures. The connectors on each of the four helium
                steam pressure signal. On investigation, the licensee discovered the root
circulators were disassembled and both the nale ar.d fema'e pins were
                valve to Main Steam Pressure Transmitter PT-5220 was nearly shut. This
checked with a micrometer to ensure their size was within a tolerance of
                valve had been repacked on February 11, 1988, and was left in a nearly
0.060 inch to 0.064 inch.
                shut position following this work.   The valve was open enough to allow the
A number of female pins were replaced, and the
                main steam pressure to equalize across it before the turbine was placed in
connectors reassembled.
                service. The valve's new paa,ing shifted, evidenced by the fact that the
Since returning to power on February 12, 1988,
                valve developed a packing leak about the time of the turbine trip, which
the licensee has experienced no significant problems wish the helium
                allowed the pressure downstream of the ,alve to be relieved. This re6fced
circulator speed cables or the associated indications and protective
                pressure was sensed by PT-5220, which then caused a turb'ne trip.
circuitry.
                The NRC resident inspectors found no instructions in Maintenance
4
                Procedure MP-2115 to return a valve to its as-found pcsttion following
At 10:40 p.m. (MST), on February 25, 1988, the license 4 experienced a
                maintenance.   Although this is not safety-related equipment, the lack of a
turbine trip from approximately 50 percent power due to a <=lse low main
                step to return the equipment to service following maintenance is of some
steam pressure signal.
                concern. The licensee considers the potential probiers associated with
On investigation, the licensee discovered the root
                this significant and will revise all m.iintenance precedures fo valves to
valve to Main Steam Pressure Transmitter PT-5220 was nearly shut.
                                                                                                        j
This
                                                              _      .. _           _
valve had been repacked on February 11, 1988, and was left in a nearly
shut position following this work.
The valve was open enough to allow the
main steam pressure to equalize across it before the turbine was placed in
service.
The valve's new paa,ing shifted, evidenced by the fact that the
valve developed a packing leak about the time of the turbine trip, which
allowed the pressure downstream of the ,alve to be relieved.
This re6fced
pressure was sensed by PT-5220, which then caused a turb'ne trip.
The NRC resident inspectors found no instructions in Maintenance
Procedure MP-2115 to return a valve to its as-found pcsttion following
maintenance.
Although this is not safety-related equipment, the lack of a
step to return the equipment to service following maintenance is of some
concern.
The licensee considers the potential probiers associated with
this significant and will revise all m.iintenance precedures fo valves to
_
.. _
_
j


          *
*
    .       .
.
  . . . . .
.
                                                    11
. . . . .
                record the as-found position before commencing maintenance and to return
11
                the valve to that position or leave it in another position with the shift
record the as-found position before commencing maintenance and to return
                supervisor's knowledge and consent following completion of the maintenance
the valve to that position or leave it in another position with the shift
                activity.   The NRC resident inspectors will monitor the licensee's
supervisor's knowledge and consent following completion of the maintenance
                implementation of these measures.
activity.
                No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
The NRC resident inspectors will monitor the licensee's
                area.
implementation of these measures.
              8. Radiological protection
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
                The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's activities in this
area.
                area to verify their conformance with policies, procedures, and regulatory
8.
                requirements.
Radiological protection
                Health physics professionals were observed on all shifts, performing plant
The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's activities in this
                tours, area surveys for radiation levels and radit. .ive contamination,
area to verify their conformance with policies, procedures, and regulatory
                and checking the operability of area radiation man, toes and continuous air
requirements.
                samplers. The NRC resident inspectors verified tha the results of area
Health physics professionals were observed on all shifts, performing plant
                surveys were posted at entrances to radiation areas and in other
tours, area surveys for radiation levels and radit. .ive contamination,
                appropriate locations.   Health physics supervisors and personnel were
and checking the operability of area radiation man, toes and continuous air
                aware of the plant status and activities which involved potential
samplers.
                radiological concerns.
The NRC resident inspectors verified tha the results of area
                The NRC resident inspectors observed that health physics personnel were
surveys were posted at entrances to radiation areas and in other
                present and available to provide astistance whenever workers are required
appropriate locations.
                to enter a radiologically controlled area.
Health physics supervisors and personnel were
                No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
aware of the plant status and activities which involved potential
                area.
radiological concerns.
              9. Physical Security Observation
The NRC resident inspectors observed that health physics personnel were
                The NRC resident inspectors vcrified that there was a lead security
present and available to provide astistance whenever workers are required
                officer (LS0) on duty authorized by the facility security plan to direct
to enter a radiologically controlled area.
;                security activities onsite for eac's shif t. The LSO did not have duties
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
                that vould interfere with the direction of security activi+1es.
area.
                The NRC resident inspectors verified, randomly and on the backshift, that
9.
                the minimum number of armed guarcs required by the facility's security
Physical Security Observation
                plan were present. Search equipment, including the X+ ray machine, metal
The NRC resident inspectors vcrified that there was a lead security
                detector, and explosive detector, were operational or a 100 percuat
officer (LS0) on duty authorized by the facility security plan to direct
                hands-on search was being utilized.
security activities onsite for eac's shif t.
                The protected area barrier was surveyed by the NRC resident inspectors.
The LSO did not have duties
                The barrier was properly maintained and was not compromised by erosion,
;
                openings in tl.. fence fabric or walls, or proximity of vehicles, crates or
that vould interfere with the direction of security activi+1es.
                other objects that could be used to scale the barrier.     The NRC resident
The NRC resident inspectors verified, randomly and on the backshift, that
                inspectors observed tne vital area barriers were well maintained and not
the minimum number of armed guarcs required by the facility's security
                ccmpromised by obvious breaches or weaknesses. Th NRC resident
plan were present.
Search equipment, including the X+ ray machine, metal
detector, and explosive detector, were operational or a 100 percuat
hands-on search was being utilized.
The protected area barrier was surveyed by the NRC resident inspectors.
The barrier was properly maintained and was not compromised by erosion,
openings in tl.. fence fabric or walls, or proximity of vehicles, crates or
other objects that could be used to scale the barrier.
The NRC resident
inspectors observed tne vital area barriers were well maintained and not
ccmpromised by obvious breaches or weaknesses. Th NRC resident


      ~
~
- .     .
- .
...o
.
                                                12
...o
              inspectors observed that persons granted access to the site were badged
12
              indicating whether they had unescorted or escorted access authorization.
inspectors observed that persons granted access to the site were badged
              No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
indicating whether they had unescorted or escorted access authorization.
              area.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
          10. Exit Meeting
area.
              An exit meeting was conducted on March 8, 1988, attended by those
10.
              identified in paragraph 1. At this time, the NRC resident inspectors
Exit Meeting
              reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection.
An exit meeting was conducted on March 8, 1988, attended by those
                                . -
identified in paragraph 1.
                                        .               -.                       ..
At this time, the NRC resident inspectors
reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection.
.
-
.
-.
..
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 15:20, 24 May 2025

Insp Rept 50-267/88-03 on 880201-29.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Action on Previously Identified Findings,Operational Safety Verification,Followup of Unusual Events,Esf Walkdown & Physical Security Observation
ML20150F008
Person / Time
Site: Fort Saint Vrain Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/25/1988
From: Farrell R, Michaud P, Westerman T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20150F000 List:
References
50-267-88-03, 50-267-88-3, NUDOCS 8804040236
Download: ML20150F008 (12)


See also: IR 05000267/1988003

Text

..

. . .

.

.-

.

.

. - _ .

.

.

.

'

. .

. .

, , .

.-

t

.

>

%

>

'

APPENDIX B

U. S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION

4

,

'

REGION IV

1

>,

,

'

.

NRC Inspection Report:

50-267/88-03

License:

DPR-34

-

Docket:

50-267.

Licensee:

Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC)

Facility Name:

Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station

Inspection At:

Fort St. Vrain (FSV) Nuclear Generating Station, Platteville.

.

~

Colorado

I

t

Inspection Conducted:

February 1-29, 1988

/f

i

Inspectors:

[

)~8O8

R. E. Farrell,"Senior Resident Inspector (SRI)

Date

Y(A/r

3*/79

,

F. W. Michaud, Rbsident Inspector (RI)

Date

!

'

d

3/2b

Approved:

}

tt)

e

T.'F. Westerman, Chief

D6te'

Reactor Projects Section B

'

!

,

W

W

,

t '

i

8804040236 890331

PDR

ADOCK 05000267

0

DCD

_

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. .

.

.

.

2

Inspection Summary

Inspection Conducted February 1-29,1988 (Report 50-267/88-03)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection of folicwup of licensee

action on previously identified findi;.gs, operational safety verification,

followup of unusual event, engineered safety features walkdown, monthly

surveillance observation, monthly maintenance observation, radiological

protection, and physical security observation.

Results: Within the eight areas inspected, one violation was identified (the

failure to implement and follow procedures for maintenance and operations

activities, paragraph 4).

l

!

l

t

!

I

!

I

l

._--____ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_

'.

'

.

.

.

.

3

DETAILS

1.

Persons Contacted

FSV

  • L. Brey, Manager, Nuclear Licensing and Fuels

"M. Ferris, Manager, Quality Assurance (QA) Operations

  • C. Fuller, Manager, Nuclear Production
  • M. Holmes, Manager, Nuclear Licensing
  • F. Novachek, Manager. Technical / Administrative Services
  • P. Tomlinson, Manager, QA

,

  • D. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering
  • R. Williams Jr. , Vice President, Nuclear Operations
  • J. Reesy, Staff Assistant, Nuclear Engineering
  • F. Borst, Nuclear Training Manager

,

  • M.

Deniston, Shift Supervisor

  • S. Hofsetter, Nuclear Licensing
  • M. Block, Superirtendent, Nuclear Betterment

l

  • L. Scott, Manager, QA Service
  • R. Sargent, Assistant to Vice President, Nuclear Operai1ons
  • R. Webb, Maintenance Supervisor

The NRC inspectors also contacted other licensee and contractor personnel

,

during the inspection.

  • Denotes those attending the exit interview conducted March 8, 1988.

!

2.

Followup of Licensee Action on Previously Identified Findings

(Closed) Open Item 267/8507-06: Shorten Time Between Change Notice (CN)

Issue And Notation On Drawing - In some cases, a caution that changes had

been made under a CN was not reflected on the affected drawings for 30

.

days or more af ter a CN was issued.

This presented a concern that a

modified system or component could be in service for that amount of time

without adequate drawings.

By utilizing a computerized document update

information system, the licensee has shortened the time involved to mark

all affected drawings to approximately 1 week, with the drawings in the

control room, shif t supervisor's of fice, and records center updated the

2

same day a CN issue notification is received. The NRC inspector verified

these activities are taking place by direct observations and a review of

'

documentation.

This item is closed.

(Closed) Open Item 267/8507-07: Devcon Epoxy Only Qualified to 200 F.

Epoxy used to attach thermocouples to control rod drive assemblies was

qualified to enly 200*F, while actual operating temperatures can exceed

200 F.

Two tests were performed by the licensee to establish this

adhesive's acceptability.

One test performed under Fuel Handling

Procedure 100-31 involved a visual examination and measurement of force

,

,e, , ,

e

+,,_mmr.n.,rs.

-r,

,-g

~

a,---.,


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

e,-e

s---,ww,w<-

- - , -

__

..

.

.

.

4

required to remove the epoxy from a CRD element, which had been subjected

l

to varying power operating conditions in the reactor core between 1979 and

1984.

The second test, T-288, involved subjecting epoxy to greater than

l

1

300 F temperature and then performing a pull test to verify that

thermocouples remained sufficiantly attached. Based on these tests, the

licensee concluded the Devcon ep;xy was acceptable for use in applications

,

up to 300 F.

The NRC resident inspectors reviewed the licensee's tests

'

and evaluation and found them acceptable.

This item is closed.

3.

Operational Safety Verification

The NRC resident inspectors reviewed licensee activities to ascertain that

the facility is being operated safely and in conformance with regulatory

requirements and that the licensee's management control system is

ef fectively discharging its responsibilities for continued safe operation.

The NRC resident inspectors toured the control room on a daily basis

during normal working hours and at least weekly during backshif t hours.

The reactor operator and shif t supervisor logs and Technical Specification

compliance logs were reviewed daily. The NRC resident inspectors observed

proper control room staffing at all times and verified operators were

attentive and adhered to approved procedures.

Control room

instrumentation was observed by the NRC inspectors and the operability of

the plant protective system and nuclear instrumentation system were

verified by the NRC resident inspectors on each control room tour.

Operator awareness and understanding of abnormal or alarm conditions were

also verified.

The NRC resident inspectors revieved the operations order

book, operations deviution report (0DR) log, clearance log, and temporary

configuration report (TCR) log to note any out-of-service safety-related

systems and to verify compliance with Technical Specification

requirements.

The licensee's station manager and superintendent of operations were

observed in the control room on a daily basis, with the superintendent of

operations frequently in the control room during the day and during

special tests or evolutions.

The NRC resident inspectors verified the operability of a safety-related

system on a weekly basis.

The PCRV overpressure protection system,

120 VAC vital power distribution system, reactor plant cooling water

system, and firewater system were verified operable by the NRC resident

inspectors during this report period.

During plant tours, particular

attention was paid to components of these systems to verify valve

positions, power supplies, and inst umentation were correct for current

plant conditions.

General plant condition and housekeeping were

acceptable.

Shift turnovers were observed at least weekly by the NRC resident

inspectors. The information flow appeared to be good, with the shift

l

l

l

-

. - .

.-

.

'

..

..

.

.

5

supervisors routinely soliciting comments' or concerns from reactor

operators, equipment operators, and auxiliary tenders.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

4.

Followup of Unusual Event

On February 10, 1988, at 3:47 p.m. (MST), "A" helium circulator tripped

due to a low speed signal with the reactor at 75 percent power.

The

circulator trip resulted in a reactor runback to between 50 percent to

60 percent reactor power and then reactor power was further reduced by the

plant operators to 25 percent power. While attempting to balance

feedwater between Loop 1 and Loop 2, an upset in the helium circulator

auxiliaries supplied by feedwater resulted in the tripping of "B"

and "D"

helium circuiators at 4:07 p.m. (MST).

The tripping of two circulators (A & B) in one loop r.;ulted in a loop

shutdown (ESF actuation).

The reactor operators manually scrammed the

reactor from 25 percent power with only one helium circulator running.

At 6:40 p.m. (MST), the licensee identified that an unplanned release was

occurring and an unusual event was declared.

An operator had been

dispatched to vent the surge tank associated with the liner cooling water

system.

The licensed operator dispatched to perform this function

inadvertently opened the wrong valve venting the tank to the plant stack

rather than to the gaseous radwaste system.

The total release over

approximately 200 minutes was small.

(4.26 X 105 microcuries of noble gas

activity)

The plant maintained forced circulation cooling at all timas.

The SRI

responded to the event and was onsite all night.

The Colorado Department

of Health was in contact with the site and was briefed by the licensee as

well as the SRI.

The licensee has subsequently determined that the

"A" helium circulator

trip occurred due to an apparent interchange of speed indication signal

cables during a recent equipment calibration.

The trip occurred when the

"B" helium circulator was placed in manual control for calibration.

a.

Background

The unusual event of February 10, 1988, and associated unplanned

release started with the trip of helium circulator "A".

Helium circulator speed cable daily calibration was in process when

circulator "A"

tripped.

When a circulator's speed cables are calibrated, the circuiator is

taken from auto to manual control to minimize the chances of a trip.

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ .

.

.

.

.

6

Helium circulator "A" speed cables had been successfully calibrated

and circulator

"A" returned to auto control.

Helium circulator "B"

was placed in manual control and calibration of the

"B" circulator

speed cables was in process when circulator "A" tripped.

The licensee determined that on February 2, 1988, while calibrating

the speed modules (SM) on circulator "A", SM 2109 could not be

balanced while getting its signal from cable 18194.

The technician

decided to check if the problem was in SM-2109 or in the cable 18194.

The licensee suspected the speed problems were in the cables.

Seven

spare speed cables are available from each circulator's SM.

The

technician unplugged cable 18194 from SM 2109 and plugged in

cable 18133.

With cable 18133 installed, SM-2109 balanced and was

left in this configuration by the technician.

Cable 18133 does not

sense circulator "A" speed but is a spare speed cable from the "B"

circulator,

b.

Design Information

There are two speed indications from each circulator:

a steam

turbine speed indication and a water turbine speed indication. The

water turbine speed indicator is much easier to read than the steam

indicator and generally the one the operators use.

Since both drives

are on a common shaft, the speed should be the same regardless of

which turbine is driving the circulator.

There are 12 speed cables coming from the speed modules of each

helium circulator.

Four of these cables are utilized for speed

control.

One cable for steam turbine speed, one cable for water

turbine speed, and two spares.

Eight cables from each circulator are dedicated to the plant

protection system (PPS).

Three of these cables are used at one time

(one for each logic channel).

Five cables are dedicated spares.

c.

Speed Control

The speed control circuitry looks at the water turbine indicated

speed and the steam turbine indicated speed and controls from the

higher of the two indicated speeds (no difference if everything

working correctly).

As long as the "B" circulator speed was less than or equal to the "A"

circulator speed, the control system saw no problem and chose the "A"

,

!

circulator steam turbine speed to control circulator

"A"

With

l

cable 18133 (a "B" circulator speed cable) controlling SM-2109 (the

"A" circulator water turbine SM) the problem arose during calibration

of "B"

circulator speed when the "A" circulator was in auto control

and the "B" circulator speed exceeded the

"A"

circulator speed,

l

1

--

- _ - _ .

. - .

.-.

.

.

.

.

_-

_ _ _ _ __

'.

.

.

.

7

.When this happened, the control circuit for "A" circulator, selecting

the higher speed indication, selected the "A" circulator water

turbine speed. -This was actually the "B"

circulator speed, since a

"B" cable was feeding this speed module.

This falsely told the

control circuit that the "A" circulator was running faster than the

control circuit required, so the control circuit began closing the

"A" circulator steam speed valve.

Since the control circuit was actually reading "B" circulator speed

it saw no change in the

"A" circulator speed indication and continued

to close down the "A" circulator speed valve. When the

"A"

circulator reached the low setpoint of the circulator

speed-to-feedwater flow program, which forces a limit on primary to

secondary flow ratio, the the PPS which was correctly reading

circulator "A" speed tripped the circulator.

d.

Findings

The technician calibrating the SM was utilizing licensee

Procedure SR-RE-17-W, Issue 10, "Circulator Speed Modifier Weekly

Check."

The procedure did not address cable termination.

When the technician removed the installed cable (18133) he was no

longer performing surveillance activities, but was performing

maintenance activities.

Maintenance activities are governed by the

licensee's Administrative Prosedure P-7, Issue 12, "Station Service

Request Processing." Procedure P-7 as modified by Procedure

Deviation Request 88-0006, dated January 13, 1988, specifically

states, in Section 2.0, that the procedure applies to corrective and

preventative maintenance and not to calibration activities.

Procedure P-7 is the licensee's procedure for controlling maintenance

activities.

Procedure P-7 requires initiation of a Station Service

Request to authorize, document, and control maintenance activities.

Failure to follow Procedure P-7 is an apparent violation of NRC

regulations (267/8803-01).

The operator venting reactor plant cooling water system surge tanks

was guided by System Operating procedure (SOP) 46, Issue 39, "Reactor

Plant Cooling Water System." SOP-46 in Step 3.7, "Venting the Vapor

Space in T-4601 or (T-4602)," details the steps for venting the

reactor plant cooling water surge tank vapor space to the gas waste

system.

The steps call for first opening V-4653 for Surge

Tank T-4601 (V-4654 for Surge Tank T-4602).

Then the operator is to

open V-461691 for Surge Tank T-4601 (V-461692 for Surge Tank T-4602).

Opening these two valves for each surge tank vents the vapor space of

each tank to a common line leading to the gas waste system. When

these steps are completed, the operator opens Valve V-46193, which

. . . . . .

-____

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

.

'.

.

.

8

opens the common line from the two surge tanks to the gas waste

system relieving the pressure in the , urge tanks.

All of the valves mentioned in the preceding paragraph are manual

valves. Adjacent to the valves, V-461691 on Tank T-4601 and V-461692

on Tank T-4602, are hand operated valves, V-461634P and k-461635P,

respectively. Opening Valve V-461634P after opening Valve V-4653

vents Surge Tank 1-4601 to the plant exhaust stack. Opening Valve

V-461635P af ter opening Valve V-4654 vents Surge Tank T-4602 to the

plant exhaust tank.

The valves are now clearly marked as to function.

At the time of the

incident, the valves were marked with small stamped metal tags

identifying the valves by number.

Procedure 50P-46 in Step 3.7 clearly listed the valves to be opened.

The valves were identified in the procedure by valve number

corresponding to the valve numbers attached to the valves. The

operator opened either or both Valves V-461634P and V-461635P, rather

than V-461691 and V-461592. This vented the gaseous content of

Tanks T-4601 and/o" T-4602 to the plant stack resulting in an

unplanned radioactive release.

The failure to follow

Procedure 50P-46 is second example of Violation (267/8803-01).

5.

Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Walkdown

The NRC resident inspectors performed a walkdown of all accessible

portions of the prestressed concrete reactor vessel (PCRV) overpressure

protection system to verify its operability.

Sections 4.3.6 and 6.8 of

the FSAR and Technical Specifications 3.2, 3.3, 4.2.7, and 5.2.1 were

reviewed by the NRC resident inspectors to ensure familiarity with the

system and requirements.

The as-found system configuration was compared

with drawing PI-11-5 to check their agreement. Valve positions and

labeling were verified to be correct by the NRC resident inspectors,

including the installation of lotking devices on valves where required.

All cortions of the system were physically inspected, w th the exception

of the internals of the PCRV safety valve tank T-1101 which contains the

relief valves and rupture discs.

These components will be inspected

during the next outage when T-1101 is opened.

During this inspection,

attention was paid to equipment conditions, housekeeping, and any items

which could degrade performance.

The overall condition of this system was

considered good.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

6.

Monthly Surveillance Observation

The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's performance of

selected surveillance activities as listed below. The surveillance

procedures were reviewed for conformance with Technical Spe;ification

.

.

o

.

9

requirements and to ensure they had been properly reviewed and approved

prior to commencing any tests.

The NRC resident inspectors witnessed

portions of the preparations, conduct, and v/ stem restoration for each of

these surveillance tests.

Test results were independently reviewed by the

NRC resident inspectors to ensure they met applicable Technical

Specification requirements.

Surveillance activities observed during this

reporting period included:

SR 5.4.1.1.8.b-M, "Reheat Steam Temperature Scram Test," performed on

February 1,1988.

This surveillance tests each hot reheat steam

temperature scram channel to verify alarms, actuations, and

indications.

The as-found values were measured and recorded,

acceptance values calculated and independently verified, and

calibration of the bystable amplifiers and thermocouple amplifiers

was checked at 600 F, 900 F, and 1200 F utilizing test signals.

These amplifiers were adjusted as required in accordance with this

procedure and the as-left values were recorded.

No discrepancies

were noted.

SR 5.10.8-M, "Monthly Check of Fire Hose Stations," performed on

February 2, 1988.

This surveillance verified the condition of each

fire hose station in the reactor and turbine buildings, and was

independently versfied by the NRC resident inspectors.

Each

station's hose valve was verified shut and not leaking, hoses and

nozzles properly connected, and general equipment conditions

observed.

No discrepancies were noted.

E3R 8.1.lbc-M, "Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Systein Test," performed

on February 25, 1988.

This surveillance test verifies the operation

of the gaseous waste release system automatic functions.

Instruments

which provide inputs to cause automatic isolation and ventilation

system realignments were tripped using a test signal, then each

associated damper or valve which was repositioned by the automatic

signal was verified to be in its proper position.

The instruments

and equipment were then restored to their normal lineup.

No

discrepancies were noted.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

7.

Monthly Maintenance Observation

On February 4,1988, the licensee noticed the pressure in the emergency

feedwater supply to the Loop 1 helium circulator Pelton wheel drives was

equal to the feedwater header pressure (approximately 3000 psia).

This

condition indicated a problem with Pressure Control Valve PV-21243, which

should reduce the pressure to approximately 1700 psi. The licensee took

'

the emergency feedwater header out of service at 5:57 a.m. (MST), on

February 5, 1988, to perform repairs on PV-21243 and entered Technical

Specification Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 4.0.3, since the

conditions of LCO 4.3.4, "Emergency Condensate and Emergency Feedwater

i

i

i

-

-

_ _ _ _ _

'

.

.

.

..

10

o

,

Headers LCO," were no longer satistted-

LCO 4.0.3 requires the reactor to

be ;hutdown in an orderly manner within a 24-hr Jr period. Also c' :icaale

and providing a 24-hour grace period was LCO 4.2.2.a, "Operable C. culator

-

LCO."

Repairs were made to valve PV-21243, which included replacement of

the valve trim. The associated pressure controller, PIC-21243, was

calibrated in accordance with Procedure RP-EQ-16, Issue 2, dated

October 15, 1986.

The NRC resident inspectors observed the repairs and

calibration, which were completed satisfactorily.

No aiscrepancies were

noted.

The emergency feedwater header was retu ned to service at

1 a.m. (MST), on February 6, 1988, and LCO 4.0.3 and 4.2.2.a were formally

exited at 5:15 a.m. (MST), after allowing the system to run following its

return to service.

The NRC resident inspectors also followed the licensee's actions to

correct the problems in the helium circu'ator speed cables.

The

circulator speed signals to both the indicators and the plant protective

system had been exhibiting erratic behavior at the elevated temperatures

associated with operation at higher power levels.

Troubleshooting

following the February 10, 1988, event, described in paragraph 4 of this

report, indicated a problem with the twinax cable "Cannon" connectors at

the helium circulators.

These special connectors have the male end

attached to the circulator housing and the female end attached to the

cables.

These female pin connectors have a spring-like device which in

some cases had relaxed, allowing a slight gap in the pin connection at the

elevated temperatures. The connectors on each of the four helium

circulators were disassembled and both the nale ar.d fema'e pins were

checked with a micrometer to ensure their size was within a tolerance of

0.060 inch to 0.064 inch.

A number of female pins were replaced, and the

connectors reassembled.

Since returning to power on February 12, 1988,

the licensee has experienced no significant problems wish the helium

circulator speed cables or the associated indications and protective

circuitry.

4

At 10:40 p.m. (MST), on February 25, 1988, the license 4 experienced a

turbine trip from approximately 50 percent power due to a <=lse low main

steam pressure signal.

On investigation, the licensee discovered the root

valve to Main Steam Pressure Transmitter PT-5220 was nearly shut.

This

valve had been repacked on February 11, 1988, and was left in a nearly

shut position following this work.

The valve was open enough to allow the

main steam pressure to equalize across it before the turbine was placed in

service.

The valve's new paa,ing shifted, evidenced by the fact that the

valve developed a packing leak about the time of the turbine trip, which

allowed the pressure downstream of the ,alve to be relieved.

This re6fced

pressure was sensed by PT-5220, which then caused a turb'ne trip.

The NRC resident inspectors found no instructions in Maintenance

Procedure MP-2115 to return a valve to its as-found pcsttion following

maintenance.

Although this is not safety-related equipment, the lack of a

step to return the equipment to service following maintenance is of some

concern.

The licensee considers the potential probiers associated with

this significant and will revise all m.iintenance precedures fo valves to

_

.. _

_

j

.

.

. . . . .

11

record the as-found position before commencing maintenance and to return

the valve to that position or leave it in another position with the shift

supervisor's knowledge and consent following completion of the maintenance

activity.

The NRC resident inspectors will monitor the licensee's

implementation of these measures.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

8.

Radiological protection

The NRC resident inspectors observed the licensee's activities in this

area to verify their conformance with policies, procedures, and regulatory

requirements.

Health physics professionals were observed on all shifts, performing plant

tours, area surveys for radiation levels and radit. .ive contamination,

and checking the operability of area radiation man, toes and continuous air

samplers.

The NRC resident inspectors verified tha the results of area

surveys were posted at entrances to radiation areas and in other

appropriate locations.

Health physics supervisors and personnel were

aware of the plant status and activities which involved potential

radiological concerns.

The NRC resident inspectors observed that health physics personnel were

present and available to provide astistance whenever workers are required

to enter a radiologically controlled area.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

9.

Physical Security Observation

The NRC resident inspectors vcrified that there was a lead security

officer (LS0) on duty authorized by the facility security plan to direct

security activities onsite for eac's shif t.

The LSO did not have duties

that vould interfere with the direction of security activi+1es.

The NRC resident inspectors verified, randomly and on the backshift, that

the minimum number of armed guarcs required by the facility's security

plan were present.

Search equipment, including the X+ ray machine, metal

detector, and explosive detector, were operational or a 100 percuat

hands-on search was being utilized.

The protected area barrier was surveyed by the NRC resident inspectors.

The barrier was properly maintained and was not compromised by erosion,

openings in tl.. fence fabric or walls, or proximity of vehicles, crates or

other objects that could be used to scale the barrier.

The NRC resident

inspectors observed tne vital area barriers were well maintained and not

ccmpromised by obvious breaches or weaknesses. Th NRC resident

~

- .

.

...o

12

inspectors observed that persons granted access to the site were badged

indicating whether they had unescorted or escorted access authorization.

No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program

area.

10.

Exit Meeting

An exit meeting was conducted on March 8, 1988, attended by those

identified in paragraph 1.

At this time, the NRC resident inspectors

reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection.

.

-

.

-.

..