IR 05000263/1983014
| ML20024D048 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1983 |
| From: | Charles Brown, Walker R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024D041 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-263-83-14, NUDOCS 8308030065 | |
| Download: ML20024D048 (4) | |
Text
.
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUl.ATORY COMMISSION REGION III-Report No. 50-263/83-14(DPRP)
'
Docket No. 50-263 L1 cense No. DPR-22 Licensee: Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401 Facility Name: Monticello Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At: Monticello Site, Monticello, MN Inspection Conducted: June 2 through July 1, 1983 h'
Sf Inspector: 'C.
. Brown
-/ E-O Date R. }C h./:F-7M C
)
Approved By:
D. Walker, Chief Projects Section 2C Date Inspection Summary Inspection on June 2 through July 1, 1983 (Report No. 50-263/83-14(DPRP))
Areas Inspected: A routine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspector of operational safety verification; onsite review committee; Licensee Event Reports followup; and independent review which included 4160 volt and 480 volt breaker operability. The inspection involved a total of 36 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector including six inspector-hours onsite during off-shifts.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8308030065 830718 PDR ADOCK 05000263 G
PDR x
..
'
.,y
.
.
N
'g h.
+
\\
-
.
.
DETAILS
'3
.s t
-
\\
\\
i 1.
Persons Contacted
%
,
J w
- W. A. Shamla, Plant Manager s', ^
%
- M. H. Clarity, Plant Superintendent, Engineering and Radiation-Pz;ntcetion '
-
H. M. Kendall,' Plant Office Manager 9I
'
.
,
D. D. Antony.. Superintendent of Operations
'
W. E. Anderson,-Plant, Superintendent, Operations and~ Maintenance
- R. L. Scheinost, Superintendent. Quality Engineering
'q
^
J. R. Pasch, Superintendent, Security and Services s
F. L. Fey, Superintendent,sRadiation Protection
W. J. Hill, Superintendent,' Technical Engineering
-
W. W. Albold, Superintendent of Maintenance s
R. A. Goranson, Acting Superintendent, Operating Engineering
/
The inspector also ' contacted other licensee employees irn.luding me cere *
,
of the technical and engineering staffs and reactor andssuxiliary'_
's
'
,
operators.
,
s
,
):
,
- Denotes those licensee representatives attending the exit interviesm 4g
'
2.
Operational Safety Verification
'
s The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable
,
.
logs and conducted discussions with control room operatorescuring the month of June. The inspector verified the operability of selected
'
emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified proper return N
to service of affected components. Tours of the reactor b'uilding and
-,
turbine building were conducted to observe plant equipadnt kotiditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations
.
and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiateI('for equipment in need of maintenance. The inspector by observation and direct inter-viewverifiedthatthephysicalsecurityplanwasbeiggirrJementedin
,
accordance with the station security plan.
' -.
-
The inspector observed plant housekeeping /cleani.inep conditions and verified inplementation of radiation protection controls. Th'6tnsp'ector'
also witnessed portions of the radicactive waste system controls-associated with radwaste shipments and barreling.
-
L These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that fycllity operations were in conformance with the requirements establighed,under technical specifications, 10 CFR, and administrarive'procedares.
'
.'s
'
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
3.
Onsite Review Committee-N
The inspector examined the onsite review functions conddited during'
the meetings held in June 1983, to verify conformance wit'b?technicel specifications and other regulatory requirements. This review e
'
'
__
i
.
...
,_
. _.
r hip n
- -
.w-
-)
. :
'
'9;
?~
..
.
,.
,.
3,?
-
TJ.m"'
-
included:. review group membership and qualifications; review group
-
meeting frequency and quorum; and activities reviewed including non -
i compliance items and corrective-action, proposed facility and procedure changes'and proposed tests and experiments conducted per 10 CFR 50.59,
,c and others required by technical specifications.
./
t.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
~ '
,
4.
Licenaee Event Reports Followup
~
<Through direct observations,-discussions with licensee personnel, and
. review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to deter-
.
mine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective
.
action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had
^
been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.
.
a..
.(Closed) LER 263/83-14: High Pressure Coolant Injection System (HPCI) High Steam Flow' Isolation Due to Injection Line Void. The injection line was, walked down at the time of the event and no evidence of any water-hammer was noted. The vendor stated that pumping into a void nder these conditions may cause an over-steam demand, b.
L(Closed)-LER 263/83-10: hkin Steam Isolation Valve 2-86B Fast Closure..The fast cl,osure was due to low oil level in the dashpot.
The maintenance. procedure has been revised to include a torque value for the needle valve locking nut.
..
c.
(Closed) LER 263/83-09: HPCI Woodward Governor EGR Ground Fault.
l~
This ground in.the DC bus occurred again in June 1983 and the EGR I
,
was the fault' location. The oil in HPCI lube oil sump was drained and-the sump flushed,and refilled,with oil from a new~ batch. The
. EGR and a sample of thedtcined lube oil was sent to the manufacturer for analysis. Followup on this analysis will be handled as an Open Item (50-263/83-14-01). The batch of oil used in filling the'HPCI
,
j lube oil sump during the 1982 outage and again in May 1983 was found
'
.to have the additives separating. The sampling to verify that it was good oil was just a top-of-barrel sample. The sampling procedure is now revised to include a sample from the bottom of the
,
~
,
ba'rel.
This also appears to be applicable to LER 263/83-06, HPCI I
r EGR Coil.. Failure.1
.
d.
(closed) LER 263/83-07: Esse'ntial Motor Control Center 133A Feeder
.
Breakerc Trip.' The breaker wha reclosed in approximately 15 minutes.
- i The breaker was replaced with a'apare when no reason for the trip coald be established. The breaker sas.3ater found to have one of
the phase overcurrent trip. devises to be' set low.
The out-of-l
- adjustment trip point was considered to be from drift.
F
'c '
e.
(Closed) LER 263/83-06: HPCI EGR CoilcFailure. See LER 263/83-09.
j
.N
<
!
't s
s
'
'
.'
i l
s
,
s
,.
k w
-
'
~
.
.
,
q y,
-
'
w
,
-
- -
.
.-
F. -
.-
%
'
..
.
s
'
- ;
..
5.
Electrical Breakers on Essential Buses The inspector reviewed the operating history of the 4160-volt and 480
- vole breakers associated with the planc essential buses. The review also included control power supplies, closing and tripping circuits, mechanical functions of the breakers, indications of breaker status, remote alarms and indication, maintenance schedules, and surveillance routines.
No. problem areas were noted.
,
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'6.
' Exit Inter icw i
The inepector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
throughaut the month and at.the conclusion of the inspection on June 22,
')3 1983, and summarized the se' ope and findings of the inspection activitie.s.
.
,.
,-'
-
i
4