IR 05000285/1979001
| ML19284A683 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1979 |
| From: | Johnson W, Madsen G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19284A675 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-79-01, 50-285-79-1, NUDOCS 7903150193 | |
| Download: ML19284A683 (8) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. fiUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION Arid ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report flo. 50-285/79-01 Docket No. 50-285 License No. DPR-40 Licensee:
Omaha Public Power District 1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Facility Name:
Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Fort Calhoun Station, Blair, Nebraska Inspection Conducted: January 22-24, 1979 Inspector:
c[wsh A'
/79 W. D. Johnson, Reactor Inspector Date N
f2/S/7cf Approved By:
s 4c m G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Operations and Date
'
Nuclear Support Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on January 22-24, 1979 (Report No. 50-285/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection including review of startup testing after refueling; review of safety limits, limiting safety system settings and limiting conditions for operation; and follow up on items of noncompliance and open items. The inspection consisted of nineteen (19)
hours on-site and two (2) hours at the corporate office by one NRC inspector.
Resul ts : Of the three areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in two areas and one apparent item of noncom-pliance was identified in one area.
(Infraction - failure to adhere to procedure - paragraph 7.)
7903156 icl3
.
.
.--
--
.
-2-DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. L. Andrews, Plant Manager L. J. Dugger, Reactor Engineer
,
J. F. Gass, Training Coordinator W. G. Gates, Operations Supervisor J. M. Gloshen, Corporate QA Engineer K. Holthaus, Nuclear Engineer D. W. Jones, Maintenance Supervisor
- L. T. Kusek, Technical Supervisor M. J. McFadden, Plant Engineer R. Mueller, Electrical Engineer K. J. Morris, Manager, Administrative Services G. R. Peterson, Supervisor, I&C and Electrical Field Maintenance J. C. Riely, Shift Supervisor F. A. Thurtell, Division Manager, Environmental and Regulatory Affairs
- Attended exit interview.
The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other licensee employees during the inspection. These included reactor operators, maintenance technicians and office personnel.
2.
Follow Up on Items of Noncompliance (Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction 1.a, Inspection 78-12):
Failure to perfom an internal audit on handling and storage of QA records in 1977 - The inspector reviewed the 1978 audit report for this area and the 1979 audit schedule and had no further questions.
(Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction 1.b, Inspection 78-12): Mini-Audit Summary Reports for February through June 1978 incomplete The inspector reviewed the October 1978 sumary and the November 1978 mini-audit monthly report and had no further questions.
(Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction 2, Inspection 78-12):
Failure to perfom a required internal audit on performar.ce, training and qualifi-cation of facility staff - The inspector reviewed the December 1978 audit plan and report for ;his activity.
He also reviewed the schedule of Safety Audit and Review Comittee audits for 1979. This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Noncompliance (InfractionPart1, Inspection 78-13): Lack of audit plan and report for fuel handling / fuel management audit of 1977 -
The inspector reviewed the audit plan and audit report for the October 1978 internal audit of fuel handling and fuel management and had no further questions.
.
' ~
-3-
,
,
(Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction Part 2, Inspection 78-13):
Failure to respond to audit deficiency reports within 30 days - The inspector reviewed the licensee's corrective action on this item and had no further questions.
(Closed) floncompliance (Infraction 1, Inspection 78-14):
Lack of acceptance criteria in surveillance test - The inspector reviewed revision 2 of Surveillance Test ST-HSS-5, dated November 21, 1978, and noted that appropriate acceptance criteria had been added to this procedure.
(Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction 2, Inspection 78-14):
Failure to visually inspect hydraulic shock suppressors as required by Technical Specification 3.14 - The inspector reviewed the results of the hydraulic shock suppressor inspection performed during the 1978 refuel-ing outage and revision 2 to Surveillance Test ST-HSS-5, dated November 21, 1978, and had no further questions on this item.
Follow Up on Unresolved Item (Closed) Unresolved Item 7706-7 (paragraph 15, Inspection 77-06):
Nozzle inner radius calibration block verification test - The inspector reviewed documentation supplied by the licensee pertaining to a verification test for the replacement calibration block for ultrasonic testing and had no further questions.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 7818-1 (paragraph 2, Inspection 78-18):
Missing requalification exam for individual - The licensee located the missing examination and this item is closed.
4.
Follow Up on Open Items (Closed)OpenItem 285/237 (paragraph 5.a, Inspection 77-20): Compliance with requalification training lecture schedule - During the week of this inspection, the licensee converted to a six shift rotation for licensed operators and stated that the increased availability of licensed operators would make adherence to a realistic training schedule possible.
The licensee has prepared an annual training schedule for calendar year 1979. The inspector will review this item as a part of the regular inspection program.
(0 pen) Open Item 285/252 (paragraph 5, Inspection 78-11):
Follow up on IE Circular 78-08, Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment - The inspector discussed with a licensee repre.-
sentative the licensee's progress in evaluating the environmental qualification of electrical equipment inside containment. The inspector informed the licensee that an IE Bulletin on this subject will be issued in the near future.
._
..
'
'
-4-(Closed) Open Item 205/261 (paragraph 7, Inspection 78-18): Local position indication for valves LCV-383-1 and LCV-383-2 - The inspector reviewed Maintenance Order 21220. The licensee's con-clusion on this maintenance order was that the local position indication for these valves moves only when the valves are reposi-tioned by the manual hand wheel operator. The inspector had no further questions on this ' item.
5.
Use of NAMC0 D2400X Snap Lock Limit Switches In response to IE Bulletin 78-04, the licensee provided information regarding the use of NAMC0 D2400X Snap Lock limit switches in safety-related equipment in the containment of Fort Calhoun Station.
OPPD's letter, dated March 22, 1978, identified 19 valves inside containment which use two of the above mentioned limit switches each. This letter pointed out that none of the limit switches function to provide a lock-in/ lock-out feature in the valve control circuitry, but provide only position indication.
NRC:RIV reviewed this response and found it to be acceptable as documented in inspection report 78-07.
During this inspection, the inspector informed licensee representa-tives of the NRC position that such limit switches should be qualified for operations under loss of coolant accident conditions if they provide position indication of valves which are used for primary containment isolation. The following valves using NAMC0 D2400X Snap Lock limit switches appear to have a contairment isolation function.
PCV-2909 HCV-2504A PCV-2929 HCV-2506A PCV-2949 HCV-2507A PCV-2969 Inasmuch as this type of limit switch is not environmentally qualified for loss of coolant accident conditions, the licensee is taking steps to replace them with qualified limit switches. This item remains open.
(0penItem 285/262)
6.
Startup Testing after Refueling a.
Power Coefficient of Reactivity The licensee performed Special Procedure SP-CPTP-12 on January 13, 1979 in order to determine the power coefficient of reactivity.
The inspector reviewed this completed procedure to verify that the procedure was followed and that Technical Specification limits were met during the test. The inspector also reviewed the calculations performed to obtain the power coefficient of reactivity. No items of noncompliance were identified.
.-.
--
..
..
...
.
.
.
. - -....
-
.
.
-5-b.
Nuclear Steam Supply System Calorimetric The inspector reviewed the licensee's core thermal power evaluation which was performed under Special Procedure SP-PRCPT-1, Appendix E, on January 6,1978. The inspector verified that the procedural requirements were met and that the calculation was correct. The inspector questioned the use of pressure transmitter 1397 for obtaining feedwater pressure.
This transmitter supplies a signal to two recorders in the control room, PR1397A and PR13978. The procedure calls for taking the feedwater pressure values from these two recorders and using this pressure and feedwater temperature to obtain feedwater enthalpy. The inspector also questioned whether pressures obtained from pressure transmitter 1397 would be the best representation of feedwater pressure in view of the fact that pressure taken at this point is nominally 300 psig above steam generator pressure.
Licensee representatives agreed to evaluate these questions and this item remains open.
(0 pen Item 285/263)
c.
Core Reactivity Balance The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedure for performing core reactivity balance, ST-RA-1-F.1, and had no further questions on this item.
7.
Review of Safety Limits, Limiting Safety System Settings (LSSS), and Limiting Conditions for Operation The inspector conducted a review of station operations to ascertain whether they are in conformance with Technical Specification requirements for safety limits, limiting safety system settings and limiting con-ditions for operation. This review included observation of current operations including process instrumentation indications; annunciator and status indications; direct verification of the status or position of certain components, valves and breakers; and review of certain surveil-lance and calibration records. Licensee compliance with the below listed Technical Specifications was specifically verified by the inspector.
TS Subject 1.1 Thermal margin / low pressure safety limit 1.3 Low steam generator water level LSSS Low steam generator pressure LSSS Axial power distribution LSSS Containment high pressure LSSS Thermal margin / low pressure.LSSS
.
-
-6-TS.
Subject 2.1.1 Steam generator operability Reactor coolant system leak test Reactor coolant pump starting conditions
'
2.1.2 Reactor coolant system temperature / pressure limits 2.1.4 Reactor coolant system leakage detection systems operabili ty 2.2 Charging pump operability Heat tracing system operability 2.3 SIRWT local temperature indication operability 2.4 Component cooling water pump operability Containment spray pump operability 2.6 Containment internal pressure limit 2.7 Electrical systems operability 125 VDC buses 125 VDC distribution panels Instrument AC buses AI-42A and AI-42B Station batteries Battery chargers 2.10.1 Minimum conditions for criticality 2.10.2 Shutdown margin Moderator temperature coefficient 2.10.3 In-core detector operability In-core detector alarm settings 2.10.4 Linear heat rate limit Total integrated radial peaking factor limit Total planar radial peaking factor limit Azimuthal power tilt limit Axial shape index limit 2.13 Annulus exit temperature detector operability
2.14 4.16 KV emergency bus low voltage instrument setting limits
..
.
.
-7-TS Subject 2.15 Instrumentation operability Table 2-2 Table 2-3 Table 2-4 Table 2-5 2.19 Fire pump operability Diesel generator room sprinkler system operability During this inspection effort the inspector noted several apparent discrepancies as discussed below.
a.
The inverse count rate ratio data sheets and plots for the rod withdrawal portion of the startup conducted under procedure OP-7 on December 23, 1978, could not be located. This item is unresolved.
(Unresolved Item 7901-1)
b.
Certain checklists (0I-DGl-1-CL-A thru E and 0I-DG2-1-CL-A thru E) were marked as "not applicable" on startup procedure OP-1 on December 22, 1978. These checklists were not listed on the attached form FC-84 authorizing their deletion. This item is unresolved.
(Unresolved Item 7901-2)
c.
01-RPS-1-CL-A was not dated or otherwise identified as being associated with the startup conducted on December 23, 1978.
A licensee representative stated that he would consider revision of this checklist, adding a space for signature and date. This item remains open.
(0 pen Item 285/265)
d.
Technical Data Book figure III.21 is outdated.
(0penItem 285/266)
e.
The incore detector alarm set points appeared to drift.
For example, on January 3,1979, the alarm for detector 18-2 was set at 93.3 at 1759 hours0.0204 days <br />0.489 hours <br />0.00291 weeks <br />6.692995e-4 months <br />. At 1815 hours0.021 days <br />0.504 hours <br />0.003 weeks <br />6.906075e-4 months <br />, a computer printout indicated that this alarm was set at 83.5.
This item remains open pending licensee evaluation.
(0penItem 285/267)
f.
The licensee performed ST-ICI-2 on January 3,1979, in order to set the incore detector alarms to new values determined from a cycle 5 power distribution which was performed on January 2, 1979.
Due to operator errors, the alarm limit of detector 14-1 was set above the calculated value; the ;.larm limits for detectors 18-1,18-2,18-3 and 18-4 wer t
- t at the limits which had been calculated for detectors 33-1, 33-2, 33-3 and 33-4; and the alarm limits for the last mentioned detectors were not reset from their cycle 4 values. The result was that eight of these nine detectors remained with alarm limits above the required values until January 19, 1979, when the monthly surveillance test disclosed the problem. At the time, conser-vative values were inserted for all incore detector upper alarm limi ts.
- - - -... -.. - - -. - - - -.... - -
-- --.
-
-.
-- -
.
..
-8-
'
~
The licensee's failure, on January 3,1979, to verify that the incore detector high alarm limits were less than or equal to the calculated alarm limits is an item of noncompliance.
Since the inspector verified that conservative alarm limits were inserted on January 19, 1979, the licensee's response to this item need only address corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further noncompliance.
8.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are those items for which further information is required to determine whether the items are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items are discussed in paragraph 7.
9.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
on January 24, 1979. At this meeting the inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
.
%
g
.a o,o m,
r
.. w-wm ma,e-mm-+
em mm e
n
,,m--
e a