IR 05000443/2011005
| ML12045A544 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 02/14/2012 |
| From: | Arthur Burritt Reactor Projects Branch 3 |
| To: | Freeman P NextEra Energy Seabrook |
| References | |
| IR-11-005 | |
| Download: ML12045A544 (42) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES ary 14, 2012
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000443/2011005
Dear Mr. Freeman:
On December 31, 2011, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on January 10, 2012, with Mr. T. Vehec and other members of your staff.
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.
This report documents one self-revealing finding of very low safety significance (Green). The finding did not involve a violation of NRC requirements. Additionally, a licensee-identified violation, which was determined to be of very low safety significance, is listed in this report.
However, because of its very low safety significance, and because it was entered into your corrective action program, the NRC is treating this finding as a non-cited violation (NCV), consistent with Section 2.3.2 of the NRC Enforcement Policy.
If you contest any NCVs in this report, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of this inspection report, with the basis for your denial, to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN.: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001; with copies to the Regional Administrator, Region I; the Director, Office of Enforcement, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; and the NRC Resident Inspector at Seabrook Station. In addition, if you disagree with the cross-cutting aspect assigned to any finding in this report, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of this inspection report, with the basis for your disagreement, to the Regional Administrator, Region I, and the NRC Resident Inspector at Seabrook Station.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely, /RA/ Arthur L. Burritt, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects Docket No. 50-443 License No: NPF-86
Enclosure:
Inspection Report No. 05000443/2011005 w/ Attachment: Supplementary Information
REGION I== Docket No.: 50-443 License No.: NPF-86 Report No.: 05000443/2011005 Licensee: NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC Facility: Seabrook Station, Unit No.1 Location: Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Dates: October 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011 Inspectors: W. Raymond, Senior Resident Inspector J. Johnson, Resident Inspector J. Lilliendahl, Reactor Inspector T. Moslak, Regional Inspector B. Dionne, Regional Inspector D. Silk, Senior Operations Engineer S. Barr, Sr. Emergency Preparedness Specialist S. Chaudhary, Reactor Inspector T. Burns, Reactor Inspector Approved by: Arthur Burritt, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
IR 05000443/2011005; 10/01/2011-12/31/2011; Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1; Routine
Integrated Report; Follow up of Events.
This report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors and announced inspections performed by regional inspectors. Inspectors identified one finding of very low safety significance (Green), which was an NCV. The significance of most findings is indicated by their color (Green, White, Yellow, Red) using Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Significance Determination Process (SDP). The cross-cutting aspects for the findings were determined using IMC 0310, Components Within Cross-Cutting Areas. Findings for which the SDP does not apply may be Green, or be assigned a severity level after NRC management review. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.
Cornerstone: Initiating Events
- Green.
A self-revealing finding was identified regarding the improper restoration of a condensate pump that resulted in a reactor trip. NextEra workers aligned the B condensate pump for service following maintenance without first venting air from the pump casing in accordance with the system operating procedure. The finding is greater than minor because it is associated with the equipment performance attribute of the Initiating Events cornerstone, and because it adversely affects the cornerstone objective of limiting the likelihood of events that upset plant stability and challenge critical safety functions during power operations. The inspectors conducted a Phase 1 SDP screening in accordance with IMC 0609 and determined that the finding is of very low safety significance. The finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance because NextEra did not ensure that adequate procedures and work packages were available (H.2.c). Specifically, neither the work package nor tagout used to restore the condensate pump to service vented the pump casing, and as a result, air from the pump entered the condensate-feedwater train causing a reactor trip when the A main feedwater pump tripped on low suction pressure. (Section 4OA3)
Other Findings
A violation of very low safety significance identified by NextEra was reviewed by the inspectors.
Corrective actions taken or planned by NextEra have been entered into NextEras corrective action program. This violation and corrective action tracking number are listed in Section 4OA7 of this report.
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
Seabrook operated at full power at the start of the period and experienced a reactor trip on October 6, 2011, following the loss of the A main feedwater pump during maintenance on the condensate system. The plant was cooled down to Mode 5 for maintenance on the main turbine, a pressurizer code safety valve, a safety injection check valve, and the cooling supply to the emergency diesel generators. Plant startup was held at 16% FP on October 18, 2011, due to adverse chemistry conditions in the steam generators. The plant was taken to Mode 5 on October 20, 2011 to flush the main condenser and condensate system. Seabrook resumed full power operation on October 30, 2011. Plant load was reduced to 64% FP on December 14, 2011, due to reduced cooling flow through the generator stator caused by corrosion related blockage in the stator flow channels. The plant operated at reduced load for the remainder of the period.
REACTOR SAFETY
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity
1R01 Adverse Weather Protection
.1 Readiness for Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors performed a review of NextEras readiness for seasonal extreme weather conditions. The inspectors reviewed the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), technical specifications, control room logs, and the corrective action program to determine what temperatures or other seasonal weather could challenge these systems, and to ensure NextEra personnel had adequately prepared for these challenges. The inspectors reviewed station procedures, including NextEras seasonal weather preparation procedure and applicable operating procedures. The inspectors performed walkdowns of the selected systems to ensure station personnel identified issues that could challenge the operability of the systems. Documents reviewed for each section of this inspection report are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings
No findings were identified. ==1R04 Equipment Alignment
.1 Partial System Walkdowns
==
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors performed partial walkdowns of the following system:
- The A emergency diesel generator (EDG) during operation with the B EDG unavailable during October 7 and 8, 2011 The inspectors selected these systems based on their risk-significance for the current plant configuration or following realignment. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, system diagrams, the UFSAR, technical specifications, work orders, condition reports, and the impact of ongoing work activities on redundant trains of equipment in order to identify conditions that could have impacted system performance of their intended safety functions. The inspectors also performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and were operable.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.2 Full System Walkdown
a. Inspection Scope
On October 25-28, 2011, the inspectors performed a complete system walkdown of accessible portions of the auxiliary feedwater system to verify the existing equipment lineup was correct. The inspectors reviewed operating procedures, drawings, equipment line-up check-off lists, and the UFSAR to verify the system was aligned to perform its required safety functions. The inspectors also reviewed electrical power availability, component lubrication and equipment cooling, hanger and support functionality, and operability of support systems. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. The inspectors also reviewed whether NextEra staff had properly identified equipment issues and entered them into the corrective action program for resolution with the appropriate significance characterization. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related condition reports and work orders to ensure NextEra appropriately evaluated and resolved any deficiencies.
b. Findings
No findings were identified. ==1R05 Fire Protection