IR 05000267/1987033

Insp Rept 50-267/87-33 on 871116-20.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Onsite & Offsite Review Committees

ML20237C579
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	12/09/1987
From:	Greg Pick, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20237C578	List: IR 05000267/1987033 ML20237C576
References
50-267-87-33, NUDOCS 8712220008
Download: ML20237C579 (5)

Text

_ _ _

_ __ -

o

. , . . ,

. APPENDIX'

U ?., ibCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

1'

NRC Inspection Report: 50-267/87-33 Operating License: DPR-34 Docket: 50-267 Licensee: Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC)

2420 W. 26th Avenue, Suite 15c Denver, Colorado 80211 Facility Name: Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV)-

Inspection At: Platteville, Colorado Inspection Conducted: November 16-20, 1987 Inspector: -

C /3 /9/eF7 G. A. Pick,/ fjeactor Inspctor, Operational Date '

Programs %ction, Division of Reactor Safety Approved:

'

'*//I7

/

W. C. Seidle,(Ghief, Operational Programs Date Section, Operations Branch, Divisicn of Reactor Safety Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted November 16-20, 1987 (Report 50-267/87-33)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the onsite and offsite review committee Results: Within the two areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie B71215 gDR ADOCK0500g7

.

. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

,_. _ _ - . __ , _ . _ .- . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

1 . .s .

l

DETAILS Persons Contacted

.

PSC

• O. Williams, Jr., Vico President, Nuclear Operations

• P. F. Tomlinson, Manager, Quality Assurance (QA)

• D. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering

• F. J. Novachek, Technical / Administrative Services Manager

• J. Ferris, QA Operations Manager

• F. J. Borst, Nuclear Training Manager

• H. Holmes, Nuclear Licensing Manager

• J. Eggebroten. Superintendent, Technical Services Engineering C. H. Fuller, Plant Manager D. Alberstien, Consultant, NFSC GA Technology Liaison NRC

• T. F. Westerman, Chief, Project Section B

• E. Ireland, Chief, Plant Systems Section

• E. Murphy, Reactor Inspector

• R. E. Farrell, Senior Resident Inspector

• A. R. Johnson, Reactor Inspector

• Denotes those'present at the exit intervie . Plant Operations Review Committee (Onsite Review Committee)

During this inspection, the NRC inspector reviewed the activities of the FSV Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC). The PORC activities are delineated in the facility Technical Specifications (TS) and in plant Procedure NPAP,. Issue 2, " Charter for Plant Operations Review Committee for Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station." The procedure adhered to the TS and contained expanded explanations of the PORC's purpose, membership, authority, meeting content, how business is to be conducted, records which shall be maintained, and detailed instructions for fulfilling responsibilities. The procedure permits safety significant changes (the procedure defines this term) to be implemented prior to approval by the Nuclear Facility Safety. Committee (NFSC), the offsite review committee, by sending the meeting minutes of the items of interest to the Manager, Nuclear Production, and the chairman of the NFSC; however, all potential unreviewed safety questions (USQ) require prior NFSC review and NFSC/NRC approval before implementation, if it was determined to be a USQ by the offsite review committe 'The NRC inspector reviewed the PORC meeting minutes for Meeting Nos. 742 and 743 dated September 8 and 15, 1987, respectively. The minutes  !

addressed: permanent deviations to procedures to clarify conducting j and/or understanding the activity; long-term temporary deviations created j l

- - - - - - - - _ -

__

. to control changes to existing plant procedures (e.g., operating, maintenance, and surveillance procedures) while new procedures were being developed under the procedure rewrite programs; periodic procedure review of existing procedures to verify that the procedures were workable and acceptable; approval of new procedures; review of events; and review and approval of special tests, setpoint change reports, and change notices (CN).

The minutes reviewed were detailed enough to allow someone with knowledge of the facility to understand evolutions occurring and, for someone not

. intimately familiar enough with the plant and its organization, enough information to determine items that are safety significant and worth followu The NRC inspector attended PORC Meeting No. 752 on Tuesday, November 17, 1987, as an observer. The chairman was C. H. Fuller, Plant Manager. The members in attendance were:

T. Borst, Nuclear Training Manager J. McCauley, Superintendent of Nuclear Betterment D. Evans, Superintendent of Operations Engineering T. Schleiger, Health Physics Supervisor F. Novachek, Technical / Administrative Services Manager J. Eggebroten, Superintendent, Technical Services Engineering Price Hatcher attended as a subject matter expert on the new control rod Also represented was QA by M. Ferris, Operations QA Manager, and one alternate member, M. Joseph, Technical Services Superviso The items discussed at PORC Meeting No. 752 were of similar topics and document types as reviewed in Meeting Nos. 742 and 743 described earlie From discussions with the PORC chairman, the NRC inspector determined that the PORC keeps track of items rejected from the meeting. This is done by routing the information provided to PORC and a cover sheet with the question or concern to the responsible supervisor or engineer for resolution. The cover sheet has certain required information which  !

includes: presiding chairman or alternate, item number (e.g. , PDR No. ,

ODR No., etc.), required action due date, PORC meeting number, proposed resolution, and location for acceptance or rejection by the PORC chairman who issued the concer These actions rejecting an item or requesting more information are mentioned in the minutes. However, when an item requiring followup or ,

other action was assigned to a PORC member, this assignment was not i documented as part of the formal meeting minutes. The NRC inspector finds I

!

this to be a PORC program weakness since the potential exists for lack of timely action on the followup items. The PORC charter, Procedure NPAP-2, recommends that problem items be documented for tracking purposes and the NFSC minutes reflect responsibility assignments in the minutes. The chairman revealed that he has plans for implementing a similar method for j

tracking followup items as presently exists for items rejected from POR i

!

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._____ _-_______ _ _-___- _ - ____ _ _

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

. u . i l

l I

I 4

'

The NRC inspector determined that the PORC agenda was developed from documents placed in the PORC secretaries' "PORC basket" during the wee The PORC meets weekly while it is only required to convene monthly. These weekly meetings allow for increased cognizance of the various plant-managers of significant ongoing plant evolutions in the other managers'

areas of responsibility. It was the NRC inspector's finding that the discussions held at'the PORC meeting and the items reviewed by the PORC create an effective onsite safety review committe All areas under cognizance of PORC were not reviewed by the NRC inspector; however, in the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie . Nuclear Facility Safety Committee (Offsite Review Committee)

The NRC inspector reviewed the activities of the NFSC. The facility TS and the " Charter for the Nuclear Facility Safety Committee for Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station" dated January 2,1984, describe the activities of the NFSC. The NFSC charter has expanded explanations of the administrative controls as delineated in TS AC 7.1.3. In particular, the NFSC charter has guidelines for fulfillment of responsibilities and definitions of important term The NRC inspector reviewed the NFSC meeting minutes for the 108th and 109th meetings of the NFSC dated February 5 and April 16, 1987, respectively. The meetings consisted of: approval of the previous NFSC meeting minutes; a review of plant status since the last meeting by the plant manager; review of TS changes and PORC meeting minutes; review of changes to procedures, equipment, or systems; review of audits since the last meeting; review of violations; review of corrective action requests (CAR) including the recommended action and disposition evaluation; review of reportable occurrences, tests, experiments, and design or operating deficiencies affecting nuclear safety; review of other correspondence affecting the facility such as NRC Information Notic.es, Bulletins, generic letters, and general correspondence; and any carry-over items from previous meeting The NRC inspector attended the 112th meeting of the NFSC on Thursday, November 19, 1987. The presiding official was the alternate chairman, R. O. Williams, Jr., Vice President, Nuclear Operations. The NFSC members in attendance were:

D. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering P. Tomlinson, Manager, Quality Assurance D. Abberstein, Consultant, GA Technologies E. Lane, Director, Safety and Security W. Mathevery, Consultant, NUS Corporation H. Olson, Consultant An alternate member, M. Holmes, Nuclear Licensing Manager, was in attendance for L. Brey, Manager, Licensing and Fuels. The information

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

- - _ _ - _--_-_ __ _

u .. . e

discussed was similar in content and of the.same type as that of the 108th'

and-109th meeting minutes that were reviewed by the NRC. Inspector comments concerning this meeting are provided below:

There was_a quorum present, therefore, the meeting was called to orde M. Ferris described the matrix being created on the collective competence of the NFSC members. .Dr. Olson then described his review of all past NFSC

.

minutes to determine whether there was a deportability issue. His conclusion, with explanation, was that one: previous set of NFSC minutes was not signed off properly. The next item discussed was the request for " Base Reactivity Change Approval." This was presented orally to the NFSC'with an accompanying written memo dated: November 17,.1987. The memo provided backgroun information and a-discussion of why the change was required and what the change affected. The oral presentation provided the NFSC an opportunity to ask:the' responsible reactor engineer detailed questions and to discuss the information presented. It was' agreed that a telephone poll would be taken Wednesday, November 25, 1987, to see'if the NFSC would approve this change to the procedure. The NRC inspector was advised in a subsequent telephone call with a licensee representative that the telephone poll was delayed until Tuesday, December.1, 1987, because additional informatio was provided to the NFSC member The other significant item discussed in great detail was modification and clarification to the proposed revision of the NFSC charter. These changes were documented in an October 6, 1987, memo to NFSC members and alternate The NRC inspector concluded from the oral interchange throughout the NFSC meeting on regular' business, the serious and meticulous discussions on the base reactivity change request, and the-revisions to NFSC charter that the facility offsite review committee functions as an effective and adequate independent review of significant site activitie All areas required to be reviewed by the NFSC were not reviewed by the NRC inspector; however, in the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie ! Exit Interview The NRC inspector discussed his findings with the personnel identified in paragraph 1.