IR 05000285/1981018
| ML20030D582 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1981 |
| From: | Hunnicutt D, Kelley D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20030D581 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-2.B.4, TASK-2.E.1.1, TASK-2.E.1.2, TASK-2.E.4.2, TASK-TM 50-285-81-18, NUDOCS 8109010552 | |
| Download: ML20030D582 (6) | |
Text
.
.
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
F? port 50-285/81-18 Docket 50-285 License 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:
July 1-31, 1981 Inspector 772 EM 8//7/9/
D. L. Kelley, Senior Resident Reactor Inspector
/ Date Approved by:
fN kmho#
8//7/8/
D. M. Hunriicutt, Chief, Reactor Project Section 2
' Da'te Inspection Summary inspection Conducted During Period of July 1-31, 1981 (Report 50-285/81-18)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection including (1) Operational Safety Verification; (2) Maintenance Observations; (3) Annual Emergency Drill; (4) Licensee Event Report Follow-up; (5) TMI Action Plan, Post Implementation Review.
The inspection involved 122 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Within the five areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8109010552 0108'17 PDR ADOCK 05000285 O
pop
.
-
-
- -. - -
-
. - -. -. -. -.
. -..,
.. -.. -
- -.
--
,, - -.,
.-,
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- S. C. Stevens, Manager, Fort Calhoun Station W. G. Gates, Supervisor, Operations G. R. Peterson, Supervisor, Maintenance D. Dale, QC Inspector K. J. Morris, Manager Administrative Services J. Fleur, Reactor Engineer The inspectors also talked with and interviewed other licensee employees during the inspection.
These employees included licensed and unlicensed operators, craftsmen, engineers and office personnel.
- Denotes attendance at exit interview.
2.
Operational Safety Verification The inspectors performed certain activities to ascertain that the facility is being operated safely and in conformance with regulatory requirements and that the licensee's management control system is effectively dis-charging its responsibilities for continued safe eperation.
The inspector's activities and findings in this regard are described in the following paragraphs:
a.
Inspection Activities Performed Several Times Per Week l
(1) Control room observations were made which included the following items:
(a) Licensee adherence to selected Limiting Conditions for Operations (LC0's).
(b) Observation of instrument and recorder traces for abnormalities.
(c) Verification of operator adherence to approved procedures.
(d) Verification of control room and shift manning.
'
(2) Review of selected logs and records to obtain information on
,
plant operations, trends, compliance with regulatory require-ments, and assess the effectiveness of communication provided by these logs and records.
. -
-
-- -
-
-
-
-
-
.
- _.
..
.
<
l (3) During the course of control room observations the inspectors noted the alarm status of the control room annunciators.
The alarm status was discussed with several licensed operators to determine the cause for the alarm conditions.
The inspectors determined, as a result of these discussions, that for the plant status these alarms were normal and the operating staff is cognizant of the cause for the alarms.
b.
Inspection Activities Performed on a Weekly Basis
(1) The operability of selected Emergency Safeguards Features (ESF)
systems was verified by noting valve positions, breaker positions, instrumentation and the general condition of major systems com-ponents.
(2) The licensee's equipment control was reviewed for proper imple-mentation by performing the following inspection activities:
(a) Review of maintenance order log and tag-out log to deter-mine the licensee's compliance with LCO's and Technical Specifications action statements.
(b) Verification of " return to operable status of selected safety-related components and systems."
(3) The inspectors toured accessible areas of the plant at various times during the inspection to determine and/or verify equip-ment conditions, plant conditions, security, safety and house-keeping.
Observations included the following:
(a) General plant and equipment condition.
(b) Fire hazards.
(c) Control of combustible material.
(d) Fire watch postings and presence of fire watches when required.
(e) Physical security.
The inspection verified that the security plan is being imple-mented by observing that:
"
The security organization is properly manned and security personnel are capable of performing their assigned tasks.
!
_
_.. _ _
_
. _ _ _ __..-.,,. _. -, _ -,__ _. _ _
_. _..., _., _,,.. _ _ _ _. _ _, _.. _.
_ - _, _, _ _.
_
~
..
.
Protected Area barriers are not degraded.
.
Isolation Zones are clear.
.
Vehicles are properly authorized, searched, and escorted
.
or controlled within the protected area.
Persons within the protected area display photo identifica-
.
tion badges and persons requiring escort are properly escorted.
Vital area physical barriers are not degraded.
.
Persons and packages are checked prior to entry inte tha
.
protected area.
- nspectors observed sevai.11 shift turnovers and reviewed j
..eral shift turnover shee15,.
)
'
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Maintenance Observations The inspectors observed portions of a maintenance activity M.0. 10773, a.
Repair of DG-1 Speed Sensor, b.
The inspectors determined through personal observation and review of records, where appropriate that:
(1) These activities were not violating Limiting Conditions for Operations.
(2) Redundant components were operable.
(3) Required administrative approvals and tag-outs were obtained prior to initiating the work.
(4) Approved procedures were being used, if appropriate.
(5) The procedures used were adequate to control the activity.
(6) Activities were being accomplished by qualified personnel.
(7) Replacement parts and materials being used were properly certified.
_ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _
..
.
(8) Radiological controls were proper and are being properly implemented.
(9)
Ignition source controls were properly implemented.
(10) QC hold points, if any, were observed.
(11) Equipment was properly returned to service.
c.
The inspectors reviewed outstanding job orders to determine that the licensee is giving priority to safety-related maintenance and that a backlog is not developing on a given system which could affect its operability.
The inspectors also determined that the proper approvals were obtained for job or'iers which appear to constitute design changes.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Annual Emergency Drill The license a conducted the Annual Emergency Drill on July 22, 1981.
This drill was nionitored by inspection teams from NPC Headquarters, Region IV, and FEMA personnel.
Formal reports covering th = drill are being prepared by NRC and FEMA.
5.
TMI Action Plan - Post Implementation Review The following items of NUREG-0737 were due implementation on July 1,1981:
II.B.4..A Training for Mitigating Core Damage - Status:
Compieted 4/1/81.
II.E.1.1.1. Auxiliary Fet dwater System Evaluation.
Short-term system inodifications - Status:
Deferred to 1981 refueling outage.
II.E.1.2 Auxiliary Feedwater System Initiation and Flow.
1.8.2. Initiation - Safety Grade - Status: Deferred to 1981 refueling outage.
2.C.2. Flow Indication - Safety Grade - Status:
Deferred to 1981 refueling outage.
l II.E.4.2. Containment Isolation Dependability.
5.B. Containment Pressure S tpoint - Modification - Status:
Completed 7/1/61.
II.E.4.2.7. Radiation Signal on Purge Valves - Status:
Completed 7/1/81.
Nu violations or deviations were identified.
.. - _,
_. - - -.. _, _ _ _ -,, -
_
, _ _ _ -,
,,. -.
.,. _.
._,.
.
....
,
,
l 6.
Licensee Event Report Followup
The following LER's were reviewed to verify that:
Csrcect reporting requirements were met.
.
I Propar corrective action was identified and taken
.
Licensee administrative procejures were followed in evaluation
.
and review of the event.
LER's reviewed:
>
LER 81-006
"B" Power Channel Degradation LER 81-007 - Failure of DG-1 Speed Sensor, i
"
7.
_Ex.'.,. Interview
,.
i The inspector met with S. C. Stevens, Manager, Fort Calhoun Station to
!
review the scope and results of the inspection.
i i
1
'
.
!
,
f i
, -,.,. - -,, _
-,__.......,,.,--,w.,m,-
.m
..,..,._,,.,.,,_m.,.,_.,_,,.__y.,,_,,.,,.-,y
,,-e-y.. _,,..,. _., _,,,,,,,,,.,,~_,,m.,_,_,~r.