IR 05000255/1996012

Insp Rept 50-255/96-12 on 961007-16.Non-cited Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Engineering & Nuclear Performance Assessment Departments Re Effectiveness in Identifying,Resolving & Preventing Problems

ML18066A799
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	12/11/1996
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML18066A798	List: IR 05000255/1996012 ML18066A797
References
50-255-96-12, NUDOCS 9612270106
Download: ML18066A799 (15)

Text

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.....* ~:** *:;~.\\,;:1~'!!11 REGION Ill

.';c,~;rk :<,;:.;~A~*!~i~~~~Jit Docket No:

License No:

Report No:

50-255 DPR-20 50-255/96012(DRS)

',**.

Licensee:

-- Facility:

Location:

Dates:

Consumers Power Company Palisades NL!clear ~enerating Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, Ml 49043-9530 October 7-16, 199.. -

.. *. *.'~ *...: :

~-. '*...

• . '

• *

f

! r

-*.~ :

_~ *

Inspectors:

Approved by:

Inspection Summary

• R. Lerch, Reactor Safety Inspector.

N. Jackiw, Reactor Satety Inspector H. Walker, Reactor Safety Inspector M. A. Ring, Chief, Lead Engineers Branch Division of Reactor Safety Routine inspection of controls to identify, resolve and prevent problems. One Non-Cited Violation was identified. Effective processes were in place for the identification and resolution of problems, although corrective actions were not always timely and thoroug Extensive self-assessment was also in effec. **--.

• • .......

_,.*;._~*.'. -.

. ___ ;_,.

~.-::~:;-.~~.

• ...

,..

-_~

• . *-*

Reoort Details Inspection Scope (40500)

• -

.. ~. **:.: :~

Inspectors observed performance-and reviewed activities in the operations, engineering, and the nuclear performance assessment departments regarding their effectiveness in identifying, resolving and preventing problems. The inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, ancj_. *

observations of activities in progress. The records reviewed were primarily related to the corrective action and self-assessment processe * -.. *

I. Ooerations

• .. Con~uct of Qpera~iQns *-

• • -

. *~.:.- -> ~: *

,.,,,

.,

• .

-

O 1. 1 Operations Department Performance Inspection Scope

. ~**.,*

The inspectors observed the Palisades plant operations staff to assess the effectiveness of the organization in promptly and effectively responding to deficiencies, tracking and analyzing adverse conditions, and maintaining effective communications. * 1n addition, the inspectors assessed the licensee's effectiveness *

in communicating department expectations to their personne <"' ** Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed the operations department's administration procedures (AD) "Operation's Organization, Responsibilities and Conduct" (AD 4.00),. and

"Control of Equipment" (AD 4.02). It was determined that the procedures clearly specify organizational responsibilities and methods for handling identified adverse conditions in the plan During an interview, the Operations Manager and Assistant Manager related that, following the 1995 refueling outage, the department had implemented a number of initiatives to improve overall performance of the department. These initiatives "

included shift crew member visits to other nuclear power plants to observe their operating and management techniques; senior reactor operator participation in INPO evaluations; realignment of licensed personnel to provide fresh input into the department and transfer of experienced operator~ into other plant departments; addition of an extra nuclear control operator during plant startups and shutdowns; communications enhancements; weekly management overviews of operator performance; etc.

T'

.;: :=

• ... '*

• I

. ~..

..

. ; -'

:*. ~'- --"'. *: -.

_-,_ ~,~~~::-f.. ~. :.

~*.. ~:~~_.... *... <-'.

... \\-~ -~-.

. *.....

The inspectors independently observed control room activities, including shift

,_.,.

turnovers, shift panel walkdowns, documentation of system status and anomalous -*-

,_;*:.:*!'<

plant conditions, and coordination of system and equipment work requests...

.... ** \\.;

'.

'.

. '

'. ::-~,:~';::'.~i:.. ~:)l}_[;~4~'<'-.;~;'fi*~,;;:;~y:;i~.~~'\\~p~;:<

On October 9, 1996, the inspectors accompanied an auxiliary operator (AO)durin*g *..

• ...

• * *

his rounds of the plant primary systems. The inspectors observed the AO performing filling activities on a waste gas system tank to bring the tank level into specifications for hydrogen limits. These actions were accomplished using tt:'le required station procedures. Communication and coordination efforts with the control room during these activities were good. Discussions with the AO revealed-that the AO rounds are conducted using inspection guidance provided in the "On*

The Job Training (OJT) Manual" OJT-11. The inspectors reviewed this guidance and

• found it to contain appropriate detail to conduct a quality inspection, while at the same time, the procedure was flexible enough to permit the operator to follow up on _observed anomalies. The inspection guidance also contained appropriate

, expectations.for inspec.ting material and housekeeping conditions of the~ plant.*:.The *

areas that were inspected during these rounds included the component.coqling*

~*. '

. ~

l -

water area, the charging pumps area, the refueling floor, etc. No equipment or*.:_.. **., * :_:

.

ho4sekeeping anomalies were note Since the beginning of September 1996, the licensee had implemented an electronic log keeping process for AO rounds. This involved a system using a hand held computer to document data during plant tours and had been implemented in lieu of using rounds checklists. Following the tour, the data obtained is downloaded into a computer and provides useful information regarding the tracking and trending of

• plant parameter * * *

• During the tour, the inspectors observed the AO 's response to a high pressure *

alarm on the waste gas surge tank. While the AO was in the C-40 panel area, he was informed by control room personnel via the station paging system that the off normal annunciator had alarmed indicating that there was a problem in the waste gas processing system. The AO pro111ptly responded to the alarm and noted that the Waste Gas Surge Tank Hi/Lo annunciator was illuminated and a local indicator was showing high pressure in the surge tank. The AO correctly utilized the station Alarm Response procedures and appropriately started one of three available *

compressor pumps to lower the pressure in the tank. During this process, the. AO noted that the indicated pressure had decreased within acceptable limits, but the annunciator did not reset as required. This discrepancy was documented by the AO for further follow-up and review by appropriate technical personnel. The AO's actions in this regard indicated a good questioning attitude and appropriate knowledge of system operating characteristic The inspectors reviewed plant procedures and training material relating to inspections conducted by plant operating personnel and found them adequate. The auxiliary operators received on-the-job (OJT) training and are provided with detailed inspection guidance for conducting operator rounds.

. '

.:;:*<

.1

... *~- -- Conclusion The inspectors determined that the licensee's program for management o(the...

. Operations Department activities was effective. Specifically, the inspectp.rs.nqted ~~"'~:~*:;l that the control operator and auxiliary operator turnover process was effective.*. * *

• *

Also, the inspectors found that the AO observed and had an appropriate questioning attitude while responding to an anomalous plant condition. Additionally, the recent control room redesign enhanced the control and command of daily plant operation.2 Corrective Action Implementation and Effectiveness Inspection Scope b.

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's assessment activities to evaluate the effectiveness of licensee controls in identifying, resolving, and preventing issues

.. that ~egrade.the quality of plaot operations or safety. These controls incl.uded the *-**. *

corrective action and self-assessment programs, involvement in the timely-and *.

effective resolution of technical issues, plant operators' knowledge of systems and".

i~tive involvement in ensuring the reliability of these systems, knowledge of the various regulatory requirements and programs relating to plant systems, and awareness of industry events and how they impact the Palisades plan Observations and Findings *

The inspectors selected a sample of issues/problems for detailed analysis to assess*

the licensee's ability to identify and correct problems. Additionally*,* the inspeqtors evaluated the licensee's process for initial identification and characterization oHhe specific problems, elevation of the problems to proper levels of management for resolution, disposition of any operability/reportability issues and implementation of corrective actions, including evaluation of repetitive conditions. Items reviewed included:

(1)

Operational events, testing, or maintenance activitie (2)

Deficiencies requiring safety evaluations or operability determinations. *

(3)

Procedural adherence deficiencie (4)

QA audits and self-assessment (5)

Deficiencies tracked in the licensee's corrective action programs, including the evaluation of deferred items, or interim resolution (6)

Results of licensee audits that evaluated the effectiveness of the associated corrective action programs.

',-:*

(7)

.* ;......

)\\?}~f~ ;:

.*. '. :*~*.. :'.'..::_:*':~~~::,~~;;.'

Interviews with selected individuals involved with the licensee's problem. :. *.

,_,

identification process to determine the extent of the individual's

• * * *. *** *: * * :-:.>>.;

.'t~*: -~

understanding of the process and willingness to report problems.. -..* ~.. /** >. :.:~,..-; :-.~,.,~'*.

.

.

.

-..

. >>.~:~)/~?:{('.'.:~'2>:.*>*~~lf~:;,:~~::[:(:;;i~~-.:;

The inspectors reviewed audit PA-96-08, dated May 29, 1996, which focused ori

• • .*-~;;-.. :**.<.;... ** **

the Operations department's activities and the department's compliance with.

applicable requirements of the Consumers Power Quality Program.* The inspectors noted that the audit identified strengths and areas requiring improvements. The inspectors considered the level of detail described by the issues indicative" pf an in-depth review by the quality assurance (QA) organizatio * Conclusion Based on interviews with operations personnel and review of the above records which indicated that problems were being identified and corrective actions for th.ose

,*_.. *-,

• • • *. problems were bei.ng sgecifie.d... the inspectors concluded the licensee'~ *self-<.>.~~.. * * *".~. ).

04 assessment program has been effective.. The inspectors considered tha.t quality:'

assurance audits were of appropriate depth and scop *

• **

.* *..

Operations Staff Knowledge and Performance Inspection Scope (375501 The inspectors interviewed and conducted tours with various plant operators to evaluate the ~apabilities of the operations organization with regard to experience arid understanding of responsibilitie * *

• **

Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed system status with several cognizant plant operators. In-plant tours and discussions with the operators indicated that overall they had* good knowledge of their systems with respect to significant maintenance performed and *

identified problem Conclusions The inspectors considered the operations personnel, as reflected by those individuals interviewed and observed, to be knowledgeabl Quality Assurance in Operations The inspection activities described in this area included the functions of the Nuclear Performance Assessment Department (NPAD). A common NPAD provided support for both the Palisades and the Big Rock Point Nuclear Plants. During this inspection, emphasis was placed on information and actions relating to the Palisades plant; however, some activities were conducted jointly for both plants.

'.. -

.. *- '.,'

~ -

0.7. 1 Self-Assessment Program

-.

-:*".:

-,'*:_-~~;~~-- *:t

.

.. Inspection Scope

.. '

?<*.:*;' ! >'::-~i ~:;;*,~/::!-~~~:;.

The inspectors reviewed the documented self-assessment program description, implementing procedures, detailed plans and performance records. These documents and records were discussed with licensee personne Observations and Findings

.,;'...

The inspectors reviewed Procedure No. 1.09, Revision 3, "Self-Assessment;" which *

was the implementing procedure for the self-assessment program. The procedure was adequate and appeared to describe a good self-assessment program. '.

A description of self-assessment activities for the past year was also reviewed.

. Thes~ activities included the.formation of the NPAD and the assignment *of a Self-.

Assessment Coordinator in October of 1995. Additional steps included the development of department plans for departmental self-_assessmen *:..

Implementation of these plans was verified by reviewing reports of completed departmental self-assessment Conclusion Based on the review of these records and the discussion of the self-assessment program and activities with licensee personnel, the insp13ctors considered the self-assessment. program and implementation to be *capable of providing valuable performance insight.2 Corrective Action Process Inspection Scope The inspectors reviewed the documented methods used in the corrective action process. This review included detailed plans, implementing procedures, and records of performance. Implementation of these documents was discussed with licensee personnel. *

Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed Revision 15 of Procedure 3.03, "Corrective Action Process," which described the methods used for documenting problems and the corrective action process. This procedure described the use of the condition report (CR) for problem identification and tracking and indicated that a CR would be categorized as a level 1, 2, 3 or 4 CR based on the importance and priority of the problem. Level 1 CRs were used to document the most significant problems, and Level 2, 3, and 4 CRs, those problems of decreasing importance and priorit Problems documented on Level 4 CRs did not require cause investigation and action to prevent recurrence. Licensee personnel stated that unnecessary root cause

• .':. *-.-

-'.

...

.

• ~. :.. ~:-

\\'_'. :*;...

. -

. *'

. ;.~.

..

.. '... *:1 investigations and corrections were impacting other important efforts. An effort.

• -* *

was underway to ensure proper CR classifications in order to avoid excessive root

• :".-.-* :_*

cause investigation effor *

' '-:~-

-;; s'._:_'~j::-~r~~:.*~~~~l~:-~~*,

The inspecto.rs were concerned that the procedure allowed the closing of a CR by issuing a work order for appropriate hardware repairs. The inspectors reviewed Revision 19 of Procedure 5.01, "Processing Work Requests/Work Orders,".

however, and noted that Section 8.4.3 of the procedure prohibited the canceling of a work order written to close a CR unless another form for correcting the. deficiency *

• ...

, *

had been establishe The inspectors reviewed a Corrective Action Log, dated September 27, 1996, which listed condition reports issued from October 1995 to September 27, 199 The list contained 1407 CRs which had been written during this one yec;ir perio The number of CRs written and a cursory review of the type of problems

.

.

docu~ente.d indicated that the.threshold for writing CRs was appropriately low._- A.:.(:"':-**'*

listing of open CRs, which included scheduled completion dates, was also reviewed. ;;

None of the listed CRs were past the assigned completion date..* ::* *:..

', * -..

A number of CRs were selected from these lists and reviewed. No problems were

.noted with the listings or the CRs reviewe A Correction Action Review Board (CARB) had been established to review CRs which.had been categorized as level 1 or 2. The duties of the CARS included evaluating the appropriateness of operability.and re portability determinations and assuring _that appropriate immediate corrective actions were fa ken to resolve*these important matter The inspectors attended a meeting of the CARB on October 11, 1996. This meeting was held to discuss level 2 CR number C-PAL-96-1160. The discussions and decisions appeared to be appropriate and individuals were assigned to follow and expedite required actions. The CARB appeared to be a valuable tool to ensure prompt and thorough management review of significant problem Conclusion The corrective action system was functioning well. The licensee had identified that evaluations and corrective actions did not fully meet management expectations for consistent effectiveness, however, and a level 1 CR had been recently writte Licensee personnel stated that this CR was written to ensure that improvements were made to the corrective action progra The CRs reviewed in this area appeared to be adequately identifying problems; however, only limited inspector reviews of the effectiveness of corrective actions were performed. In addition, licensee actions to reduce root cause investigation efforts and other program changes for the Level 1 CR were still in progres '"

.. >- : :~* **; :;.. :::_:::~:_'.:.:i_;I1_~.f {;g_~).:

. ': *""'* _:,.

- -

.

• .*.. ;

"".. :t.i,~.,:,.~ ~-o:;~!;*;~~-0.~-'*.~':ii

--

.-.;~.<~>:**-::.

-.:... ~'. -_. ~- -

07.3 Trending

~*

., *_ ::; }

- ~:.;~~: _;.;;.~~-~;'.:~~i:;~

---,... *. ~**

... Inspection Scope

'*

~-- *. --* *:

...

• • * *. ::::::>.:

. *.. -**_. * * * *

.

-*

• ., -:* : ** * *.: *

. : ~-*-.;*:*:*)f{:,f;i~/~D;:~~::f)~is;ik?-]~,,1~~~(;

The inspectors reviewed the trending program and selected trend repOrts:>The' *': - ~;_,;**~;::)=\\'.:'-,'~,', **.. -

review results were discussed with licensee personne,.'\\. - Observations and Findings

. *.'.

The inspectors reviewed the four trend reports issued in 1996 and ~- tre.nd report:'

.:

issued for the first quarter of 1995. Negative trends were identified to management.,

• by use of these trend reports. In addition to documentation in trend report's',

.

.

significant adverse trends were documented on CRs.. The CRs were processe*d. '-._ * *

through the normal corrective action syste ' - * *

. ' '

- **?" *.* :._.-.. >*

..

~--*... '-:The i~sp~Ct()fS requ~st~_d_an_ct..c.~viewed four CRs which had been wrltte_li oh -

.

identified adverse trends. A level "1" CR, number C-PAL-96-0495, was writlen.:on ~

Appendix R (Fire Protection) problems; level 2" CRs were written on. pr_oblem's \\Yith *:

the domestic drinking water system (non-safety CR number C-PAL-96-0551 ), wrong or defective parts in stores for plant recorders (CR number C-PAL-96-064 7), and inadequate tagging boundry for work order scopes, (CR number C-PAL-96-0692).

Action had been completed or was in progress on the listed CR Conclusion

.~.

-*

• .--.. *. _-

• The trend program was able to identify and-* address adverse* trends. * T:hJse trends:,.. *. * *, **..

were identified to management and the CR system was used to.ensure that*

"'

corrective actions were take.4 Audit Program Inspection Scope The inspectors reviewed the documented audit program, including the audit log and schedules for 1 ~95 and 1 996. Records for several completed audits, selected from the audit logs, were reviewed. The review results were discussed with licensee personne Observations and Findings The audit logs and schedules indicated adequate audit coverage of plant activitie Records of selected audits that were reviewed indicated that the audits were adequately performed. Findings were documented on CRs and were tracked using the CR system. A review of listings of Audit Report Significant Condition Reports for both 1995 and 1996 indicated that significant problems were noted during the audits. A review of selected audit related CRs indicated that the findings were followed up and adequately closed.

..

-.

'~. '

..

I****, *..

... -* -_-.

- --*** -.... ' : ">* - Conclusion

• -

• ,

• .:.~-.*~*-~*~'."-__ :**1'

The audit program covered the required areas and was iden-tifying prob_lem.~ and*~~.c.. ~:)~>. :;* *~~*;;~i_r(;_,~..

concerns. Audit findings were documented on condition reports/vvhi.ch~.W~r~~&:i$.e~;t:?*~;s\\~r.~:;.~,*~.t~?+/-~

for tracking and to obtain corrective actions. No problems or concerns \\r,iere noted~.... :~. :* _... _,, **

Miscellaneous Operations Issues 9 During the review of the self-assessment and corrective action processes, the

...

inspectors reviewed the actions taken to address two inspe_ction follow up item These items had been identified during the diagnostic evaluation team (DET) :_ *

inspection conducted at Palisades in 1994. The items were 50-255/94014-73 <;>n Ineffective Corrective Action and 50-255/94014-74 on Ineffective Quality Oversight and Assessmen '

• .*..

_.:*,

...-.... _..'

-:.. ~ ~. -. -.....

_. -.,*

.. (Clos~d) Inspection Follow-1m ltem 50;.255/94014-73: The inspectors revi0.Wed

~:.:;:

records and procedures which documented the action taken to address Inspection. :

.. *. -,*

• .-

,:--,;.:

Follow-up Item 50-255/94014-73, "Ineffective Corrective Action." ThEraction was

• • • ~*;: * *" :_;- *

also discussed with cognizant licensee personnel. Review of the corrective action process is contained in Section 07.2 of this report. Periodic inspectior. of the effectiveness of this program is part of the routine inspection program. This item is closed.

. 08.2 !Closed) Inspection Follow-up Item 50-255/94014-74: The inspectors reviewed records and procedures which documented the action taken to address Inspection Follow-up Item 50-255/94014-74, *"Ineffective. Quality Oversight and Assessme*nt;"

The action taken was also discussed with cognizant licensee personnel. Th *

actions taken on self-assessment appeared to be appropriate and are described in Section 07 of this report. This item is close Ill. Engineering E1 Conduct of Engineering E1.1 Identification and Resolution of Issues (40500) Inspection scope Through discussions with the licensee's staff and review of documents, inspectors reviewed actions taken by the licensee to resolve inspection open items, licensee event reports (LERs), and condition reports (CRs) as well as issues identified in industry reports.

• Observations and Findings ( 1 )

• (2)

Anchor Darling Air Operated Valves !AOVsl

.~* : -. -

An issue was identified by the LaSalle County N.uclear Power Station that *

the effective diaphragm area for AOV actuators was less than that specified by the manufacturer. Inspectors discussed this issue with the Palisades engineer responsible for establishing an AOV performance evaluation program. This issue could potentially lead licensees to expect a greater actuator force than could be delivered. The staff at Palisades had heard of this problem from the LaSalle staff at an industry valve workshop in June of 1996 and had modified program procedure EM-28-03 to look for and compensate for the potential *diaphragm effective size discrepancies. This was applied to all other manufacturer diaphragms as wel Raychem Splices The licensee had identified that Raychem sleeving used in environmentally* * *..

qualified (EQ) butt splices were not qualified to shrink to the size of Rosemount transmitter leads of.037 inch diameter. This issue was tracked under IFI 50-255/95014-03. In response to NRC concerns for reliance on field cable jackets for preventing moisture intrusion, the licensee selected a splice design which applied a boot seal over the field cable leads. The inspectors discussed the status of these splices with the licensee. A specification for the use of adhesive under the Raychem WSF-050N sleeves on the Rosemount leads to provide additional sealing was also added to the.

joint design. The transmitter side of the splice was sealed by an overall sleeve seal to the Rosemount seal pigtail jacket, which has been qualified and can be fully inspected for damage. Review by NRR determined that this splice design would be environmentally qualified provided all the Raychem components of the qualified type and sizes were properly installed, the condition of all the Rosemount pigtail jackets was verified, and a complete EO documentation file prepared as required by 10 CFR 50.49 *reflecting the new configuration. The licensee was preparing work packages to install the new splice design during the fall outag At the time the Raychem sleeving issue was identified, the licensee identified the presence of exposed Kapton insulation on "V-bolt" splices to Rosemount transmitter leads. All of the "V-bolt" design splices were replaced with.the old butt splice design. Design review process improvements and EQ training of engineers led to this problem being identified. The LER is closed, but the IFI remains open pendin.g replacement of the splices in the fall 1996 outag (3)

Primary Coolant Pump Oil Collection System In January 1996; the licensee submitted LER 95-014, ~*Primary Coolant Pump Oil Collection Deficiencies Created by FC-860 Piping Modification."

.,

.

~..

.:...

• , -~-r.~-

. *-.*

. ;

..

'- ~~~ -.-.

Fire protection engineers, while reviewing a proposed modification, discovered that the oil collection system had been degraded by modifications :_.*. *.. '.

{'~~.1 made in 1990. Piping had been extended so that the oil systerri w~s, out.si~e

..

.*;>;_. :: ::.*

of the oil collecting drip pans. Some other flarige covers we're.also<-id~f)tifie~.->:):~=>.~L~,;~,;;~:;::*<'

as missing. All the covers were replaced with newly made COVEfrs and

.......... *

clamped with hose clamps. Drip pans were installed, which restored the oil collection system to requirements. In 1996, a fla_nge cover was discovered broken at two welds. This was attributed to cover-weld deficiencies;*

however, when the system was repaired and restored, 100%.

replacement/reinspection of the remaining covers was not undertaken. The inspectors considered this an oversight in the overall corrective actions. The licensee agreed to revise the periodic and predetermined activity control (PPAC) procedures for maintaining the oil collection system to incorporate the lessons learned as appropriate. Failure to maintain the oil c*ollection system capable of.collecting all potential oil lea~age from 1990 to 1995 wa~"

. a viplation J.O CER 50.. Appendix R. This licensee-identified an" corrected

• • ..

violation is being treated as a Non-Cited Violation, consistent with Se_ction Vll.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Polic The inspectors reviewed the primary coolant pump monitoring program and walked down control room indicators used by the system engineer. The collection and trending of information was extensive and maintenance information on oil consumption had been increased to improve the assessment of pump status. The system engineer had also been to a seminar on the pumps and was evaluating the benefits of rebuilding the pumps in. the future.*

.

(4)

Corrective Action Timeliness Inspectors identified two examples where initiation of corrective action was *

not considered timely. Generally, however, conditions adverse to quality were promptly reporte In the first example, engineering had not yet resolved an NRC question raised in April 1996 (IFI 50-255/96003-01) of whether the loss of power to charging pump packing seal cooling system pump had any effect on operability. Two months had elapsed before the licensing staff assigned an action item for resolution. The completion date was September 1, 1996, but was extended to December 1996. During this inspection, the licensee located a report of testing done by Palos Verde demonstrating that the packing currently in the variable speed charging pump could run for 1 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> without cooling water. This is enough time for the cooldown and depressurization of the plant. The licensee agreed to include this information in design documentatio In the second example, which was an NRC Information Notice (IN) of potential water hammer to the containment air coolers, it took over one month for a condition report to be written after the IN was receive *_.t*

'

. :

...

'...., *.*. ~I (5)

Programs Tracking

', __./i NRC inspectors had identified program lapses in the past, and *so engineering-

..

. ;'.:.

tracking and trending tools were reviewed and discussed.. Engineering wor.k :,~~.>:;~~(>}.~{~;;,1 monitoring tools, which included a monthly management performance

• * * *.. * *

monitoring report and the Palisades work manage*ment system, were adequate to assess engineering performance. The licensee planned to *

enhance these systems with the use of health reports for selected program which would be periodically update (6)

Configuration Control Program Issue Closures This had been the subject of a violation EA 94-41 in inspection report *

No. 50-255/94002 for inadequate corrective actions. The licensee.

established a closeout approval cycle by five engineering supervisors to . '

review clos.eout.of issues generated from Design Basis Document (DBD) *.*

reviews. The inspectors reviewed a sample of design basis document open item resolution reports. The resolutions were thorough and appropriat This violation is closei: Conclusions

-.. "

With the exception of a few examples of untimely performance, engineering implementation of the corrective action process was working to identify and re.solve issues. Staff participation in* industry workshops and seminars was providing benefits in staff knowledge of potential problems. The staff was making proactive implementation of lessons/information garnered from these forum E. 7 Quality Assurance in Engineering Activities NPAD Assessor for Engineering The inspectors discussed the assessor's role with the engineering assessor. The assessor was a qualified individual and had the latitude to select areas to observe and to use the corrective action system to address significant problems. The inspectors reviewed the NPAD annunciator report. The observations were insightful and critica Miscellaneous Engineering Issues (92902)

(Closed) LER 95-007: Exposed Kapton cable insulation results in unqualified exposed EO cable splice (see Section E1.1.b(2)).

(Closed) LER 95-014: Primary Coolant Pump Oil Collection Deficiencies Created by FC-860 Piping Modification (see Section E1.1.b(3)).

(Closed) VIO EA 94-41 in Inspection Report No. 50-255/94002: Inadequate corrective actions identified by the service water system operational performance

.. *-

'

X1 inspection, especially in regards to issues generated by the licensee's configuration control program which was establishing DBDs (see Section E1.. 1.b(6)). **

• * :.*

_,

.o:.*

.

I

... * - * ;* -r.~

~

~ *::,.-. -

(Open) IFI *50-255/95014-03: Raychem splice shim material was. not :ea -q~ii1'itiedA~;~:;~~t.r~;~f:z_:~;~~:,if A new butt splice EQ seal design was proposed for installation in the fall outage.,...

... -.

(see Section E1.1.b(2)).

(Closed) IFI 50-255/96003-01: the configuration control program had identified that the seal cooling system for the chemistry and volume control system charging ;.

pumps was not on safety-related power; however, engineering coul~ not tell what *_ *..

effect the loss of power to the cooling system would have on pump operability (see*

Section E1.1.b(4)).

V. Management Meetings

. Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of the inspection on October 16, 199...

~. >.

r* -. :*~*

. :,.;.*

. *-... _.

• .... *. ~* ~- *. :

• ~'-,'..!

_,

.*:

• . *_; *?. ~~*~* /** j PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONT ACTED

.*.

~, -~~:*:

.,,-.: *,.. ** -~~:. *:.. :-:.i ;: ~.-*

• Licensee

. *;'.'.§{.;~.~~~~f; T. J. Palmisano, Plant General Manager K. P. Powers, Nuclear Services General Manager G. B. Szczotka, Nuclear Performance Assessment Manager H. L. Linsinbigler, Design Engineering Manager R. W. Smedley, Licensing Projects Supervisor D. W. Rogers, Operations Manager R. A. Vincent, Licensing Supervisor K. A. Toner, Nuclear Performance Assessment D. J. Malone, Chemical & Radiation Protection Services Manager K. M. Haas, Training Manager*

$. Y. yvawr<?, Plar:mi_ng &_ S_che_duling.lv'lanager *

INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 37551:

Onsite Engineering IP 61726:

Surveillance Observations IP 62703:

Maintenance Observation

.

.-

.. ~

.. *..

-. ~...

-

.:.

..

.... -.*.

....

..... IP 71707:

Plant Operations IP 83750: : **Occupational Radiation Exposure

-

• ** *

• * * -* * * " -*; * --::-: *,~

• .

• . "

IP 92700:

Onsite Follow-up of Written Reports of Nonroutine Events at Power Reactor*

Facilities IP 92702:

Follow-up on Corrective Actions for Violations and Deviations IP 92902:

Follow-up - Maintenance

• ITEMS DISCUSSED AND CLOSED Discussed 50-255/95014-03 IFI *

Raychem splice shim material was not EQ qualified Closed.

50-255/94002 VIO EA 94-41 in Inspection Report No. 50-255/94002, Inadequate corrective actions identified by the service water system operational performance inspection 50-255/94014-73 IFI Ineffective Corrective Action

. -:. -.. -: *~* *.

. ;::-

50-255/94014-74 * IFI Ineffective Quality Oversight and A~sessment

• -*.'

50-255/95007 LER

. '

.

~

- --.

_*

~. '~ ; -.. ;. :. ::r= ::*~-.*..

Exposed Kapton cable insulation results in* unqualified exposed;.. :~ '~::;,

.. ~;,"~**:,

EQ cable splice

..

;,- "..,_.., *

-,, ~-ri::}':'.:r;f?l,~:?ifJ.~t,!~:'.f~!f.:~~~f!f.~¥ 50-255/95014 LER Primary Coolant Pump Oil Collection Deficiencies Created by FC-860 Piping Modification *

50-255/96003-,01 IFI The seal cooling system for the chemistry and.volume con~rol system charging pumps was not,Ol'_l safety-related power.** _

AD*

.AOV

• • cA CARB CFR CR CRS DBD DET EQ IFI INPO IP IR LER NOD NPAD NRC NRR OJT PCS PDR PPAC QC VIO WO LIST OF ACRONYMS USED.

• Administrative ProcedULe *

Air Operated Valve Corrective Action Corrective Action Review Board Code of Federal Regulations Condition Report Control Room Supervisor Design Basis Document Diagnostic Evaluation Team E.nvironmental Qualification lnsp*ection Follow-up Item Institute of Nuclear Power Operation Inspection Procedure

Inspection Report

Licensee Event Report

Nuclear Operations Department

Nuclear Performance Assessment Department

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

On-the-job Training

Primary Coolant System

Public Document Room

Periodic and Predetermined Activity Control

Quality Control

Violation

Work Order

' ':. -*.-

'** -:'.-

.. -,.,'... -..

. ~ -. :;.

. ;..,.*. :-

• ' '

~

'

...... ; *"~.. ~..,

., ;,

'.'*'

~