IR 05000267/1990001
| ML20006C118 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 01/25/1990 |
| From: | Barnes I, Mcneill W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20006C113 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-267-90-01, 50-267-90-1, NUDOCS 9002060337 | |
| Download: ML20006C118 (4) | |
Text
.__
,
'
.
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX U.S.. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
-NRC Inspection Report: 50-267/90-01 Operating License: DPR-34 Docket: 50-267 Licenseei -Public Service company of Colorado (PSC)
P.O. Box 840-Denver, Colorado-80201-0840 Facility Name:
FortSt.VrainNuclearGeneratingStation_(FSV)
Inspection At: FSV, Platteville, Colorado-Inspection Conducted: January 8-12, 1990 Inspector:
-
/!2
W. M. McNeill, Reactor Inspector, Materials Date
'
and Quality Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety
'
Approved:
3%
s/hr/9o E Barnes, Chief, Materials and Quality Date Programs Section, Division of Reactor. Safety.
Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted January 8-12' 1990-(Report 50-267/90-01)
,
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced annual quality assurance (QA) program review.
Results: The established QA program was found to be in conformance with' the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) commitments and appeared, based on limited inspection, to be satisfactorily implemented. The inspection-focused particularly on the planning of QA activities in view of the decision to defuel--
and decommission the facility..It was found that there was a planned -
systematic approach to reorganization, in particular destaffing, which. appeared consistent with the facility transition to a decommissioned status. The QA.
audit program and its implementation appeared to be effective in meeting the required objectives.
9002060337 900123
'
t PDR ADOCK 05000267 k
o PDC
]
I
_
_
. _. - - _
-
. - _
,
,
.Q ' W j
.
.
..
.
.
l
-
-2-i DETAILS
,h 1.
PERSONS CONTACTED
?
- M. L. Block,. Systems Engineering Manager
,
- F. J. Borst, Training and Support Manager r
- S. W. Chesnutt, Supervisor Nuclear Compliance'
'
- M. E. Deniston, Superintendent of. Operations-.
.,
- D. W. Evans, Operations / Maintenance Manager.
M. -J. Ferris, Quality Assurance (QA) Operations Manager
'
- D. C. Goss, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs Manager
>
J. M. Gramling, Supervisor of Nuclear.. Licensing
-
- M. H. Holmes, Nuclear ~ Licensing Manager
.
G. W..Lindsay, Lead QA Auditor
- M. E. Niehoff, Diamond Hill Engineering Manager.
.
- F. J. Novachek, Defueling/Decomissioning' Program Manager
- G. D. Schmalz, Fire Protection Program Manager
!
L. D. Scott, QA Services Manager
.
'
i D. G. Seymore, Lead 0A Auditor L. R. Sutton, QA Auditing Supervisor i
l
- F. W. Tilson, Engineering Supervisor
,
- P. F. Tomlinson, Manager QA J
- D. W. Warembourg, Manager, Nuclear Engineering
,
![RE
- R. E. Farrell, Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those persons that attended the exit meeting on January 12, 1990.
In
'
,
L addition, the inspector also contacted other members of the:11censee's staff.
>
,
2.
,0_UALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ANNUAL REVIEW (35701)
'
The objectives of this inspection were.to ensure'that the licensee has made l
a]propriate provisions.to implement a QA program that is in conformance.with-tie Technical Specifications (TS), Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), regulatory requirements, and licensee commitments as the
,
!
transition is made to a defueled and decommissioned status.
L; 2.1 Program
!
l The inspector reviewed the TS; the current revision of the QA program
[
description, Appendix B of the UFSAR; the implementing procedures; and the
-
L current organization.
L
,
j-Observations of the inspector were as follows:
f
Le.
-
L
.'
..
-3-i Since the last inspection of the QA p ogram (see NRC Inspection
Report'50-267/88-08) there has been significant' changes to the QA
.
,
organization as 'a result of the decision to defuel and ~ to decomission the
'
facility. The QA organization has been reduced by.approximately 35 percent.
by the transfer of. nondestructive examination, materials engineering,.and fossil QA functions and-personnel to another PSC (nonnuclear)_ division.
l Tne inspector reviewed the process and methods used to' reduce the size of i
'
the QA organization-in the first and second round of 90 day ' termination-
.
,
notices. The-inspector found that there were detailed methods established
,
which appeared to follow PSC corporate guidelines to accomplish this-
destaffing.
'
The-inspector found that.a draft decommissioning plan has'been establishedL
and' reviewed with an independent consultant. :A manual (Administrative
.
>l Procedure D-1) and administrative controls (Administrative Procedure D-2)
,
for defuelingzhas been issued. These procedures have_ established the-
-
sequence of events for defueling.
It is planned' that systems and-equipment will be first taken to an out-of-service (005) status, withLa t
safety analysis-(10 CFR 50.59) performed.to assess the safety impact. The.
10 CFR 50.59 analysis for the item would be subject to review by the plant-l operations review committee and then to_ review and approval-by.a corporate I
team. The. system or equipment would then be classified as removed from.
l operational service (RF0S) status.
Finally, the nuclear facility safety
.
j.
committee would review the entire process for each item.
It-is planned
- i that, whenLin the 00S status, surveillance testing, calibration,
,
maintenance, qualification, spare part procurement,'and other item requirements could be suspended.
In the RFOSLstatus, these types of -
,
l requirements could be removed entirely, thus deleting the item from the QA
program and reducing the scope of systems and. equipment covered.
l l
Interviews with personnel responsible for QA program descri l
UFSAR established that the next UFSAR update.in July 1990-(ption in the Revision 8)
l
'
I will include major QA organization changes:in Appendix'B of the UFSAR.
One comment of the inspector was that as a result of the rapid'and l
significant changes to the QA: organization planned for the future, there
!
appeared to be a need for enhanced communication on organizational changes. UFSAR updates are required only annually._ Submittal of the revisions of the PSC FSV Conduct of Business Manual could be used as a supplement to the annual UFSAR information to keep the NRC appraised in-regard to organizational changes. Licensee personnel committed to review this matter.
2.2 Implementation The implementation of the QA program was verified during this inspection by inspection of the QA audit program. Observations of the inspector were as
follows:
,
The QA audit program had been restructured in view of the decision to
defuel and decommission. flineteen areas of audits were consolidated into five audit areas, which resulted in a reduction to 12 audits from the
<
J
f
.
.
.
!
.
1!
.t,
,
.
.
.
.. -
-
4 previously scheduled 26 audits. This restructure was premised on the
~
reduction of equipment subject to the QA program, whici permitted u
I combination of audit subject areas:for remaining active status equipment, y
l-The inspectorLfound that currently there was no detailed planning which
l would project the 00S and RFOS statuses of systems and equipment at.the l-planned times of 1990 audits. As a result, it was difficult to assess l
the feasibility!of the planned consolidated audit program. Detailed audit-plans and checklists for the consolidated audits have not been developed.
Such items are.normally daveloped the month prior to an audit. Based on-
QA personnel-estimates of audit' length, it would-appear that performance L
of the new consolidated audit schedule is ambitious.
,
The records of-three audits performed in'1989 in the areas of maintenance, procurement, and instrument and control were reviewed-by theLinspector.
The plans, checklists, final reports, documentation of findings, followup on findings, and qualifications of audit personnel were found to be in.
accordance with the established program and procedures.
'
In summary, the inspector fcund that the'QA function'was being reorganized in a a
.
planned systematic manner, which.was consistent with:the -transition of the l-facility to a decommissioned status. The approach appeared' adequate-in l
maintaining the QA program requirements of the UFSAR. The QA audit ~ program l
which has been restricted for 1990,' appears to be effective in meeting the ~
r l
objectives of the requirements in the QA program,
>
l No violations or deviations were noted during this _ inspection.
'
3.
EXIT MEETING l
An exit meeting was held on January 12, 1990, with those individuals. denoted in
!
I paragraph 1 of this report. At this meeting, the scope of the inspection and-l.
the. findings were summarized. The licensee did not. identify as proprietary any l
of the information provided to,aor reviewed by the inspector.
-
-
,
I
!
I i
k