IR 05000285/1987020

Insp Rept 50-285/87-20 on 870716-0831.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Followup on Previously Identified Items,Ler Followup,Operational Safety Verification,Monthly Surveillance & Security Observations & Special Repts

ML20234B483
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	09/17/1987
From:	Harrell P, Hunter D, Mullikin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20234B474	List: IR 05000285/1987020 ML20234B471
References
50-285-87-20, NUDOCS 8709180428
Download: ML20234B483 (14)

Text

'

.

APPENDIX U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-205/87-20 License: DPR-40 Docket: 50-285 Licensee: Omaha Public Power District (0 PPD)

1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Facility Name: FortCalhounStation(FCS)

Inspection At: Fort Calhoun Station, Blair, Nebraska Inspection Conducted: July 16 through August 31, 1987 Inspector: .

-

hP.H.Harrell,SeniorResidentReactor hl M Date M Inspector I

'

>

9f/V!F7 R. P. Mullikin, Project Inspector Date Approved: b tb hA'

D. R. Hu'nter, Chief, Reactor Project 9k Date

Section B, Reactor Projects Branch ok OK S

C

-

,:

2'

Inspection Summary

'

Inspection Conducted' July 16 through August 31, 1987 (Report 50-285/87-20)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced ~ inspection including followup on' !

previously identified items, licensee event report followup, . operational safety !

. verification, plant tours,' safety-related system walkdown, monthly maintenance observations, monthly surveillance observations, security observations,

-radiological protection observations, inoffice review of periodic and special reports, followup on allegations related to receipt insp'ection of new fuel and i use of unapproved valve. packing in . safety-related systems, and nonroutine reporting progra Results:. Within.the 12 areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie ..

'

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _

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

.

.

,

i

L DETAILS Persons-Contacted OPPD Personnel

• R. Andrews, Division Manager,_ Nuclear Production

1. • W. Gates, Plant Manager

.C. Brunnert, Supervisor,-Operations Quality Assurance ,

M. Core, Supervisor, Maintenance T. Dexter, Supervisor, Securit *J. Fisicaro, Supervisor, Nuclear Regulatory and Industry Affairs J' Foley, Supervisor, I&C and Electrical Field Maintenance

.

1. J. Gasper, Manager, Administrative and Training Services ,

R. Jaworski, Section Manager, Technical Services 1 J. Kecy, Acting Reactor Engineer L. Kusek, Supervisor, 0perations

1. • D. Munderloh, Plant Licensing Engineer T. McIvor, Supervisor, Technical K. Morris, Division Manager, Quality Assurance and Regulatory Affairs

.R. Mueller, Plant Engineer A. Richard, Manager, Quality Assurance G. Roach, Supervisor, Chemical ano Radiation Protection S. Willrett, Supervisor, Administrative Services and Security

• Denotes attendance at the exit interview conducted by P. Harrell on August 20, 1987 l

1. Denotes attendance at the exit interview conducted by R. Mullikin on August 28, 198 The NRC. inspectors also contacted other plant personnel, including operators, technicians, and administrative personne . Followup on Previously Identified Items . (0 pen) Severity Level IV Violation.285/8702-03: Failure to maintain Checklist EE-2-CL-E of Procedure 01-EE- This violation was related to the licensee's failure to maintain the procedure used for alignment of the breakers on the 480-volt motor control centers (MCC) in an up-to-date condition. The licensee revised and reissued Checklist EE-2-CL-E of Procedure OI-EE-2,

"480-Volt System (Normal Operation)," to correct the discrepancies noted during the walkdown performed by the NRC inspector in January 198 The NRC inspector performed a walkdown of the 480-Vac electrical system using the revised checklist. During the walkdown, the NRC

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

._ _ _

,

.

i

.-  ;

,

!

'

!

l inspector noted discrepancies between the plant as-built conditions I and the checklist. These discrepancies included breakers for  !

safety-related equipment that were installed in the plant but not included on the checklist and the designation for some equipment of 4 the position (1.e., open or closed) of the breaker on the. checklist

,

was not the'same as the position-in.which the breaker should be placed.- !

Nonetheless, the actual position of all breakers on the MCCs were proper, in that all the breakers for safety-related and. post-accident equipment complied with Technical Specification (TS) requirement "

.The NRC-inspector also reviewed FSAR Figure 8.1-1, " Simplified I One-Line Diagram, Plant Electrical System," to verify that the diagram ;

correctly depicted the electrical loads supplied by the appropriate MCC. Based on the selected items reviewed, it appeared that the licensee had updated Figure 8.1-1 to accurately indicate the plant as-built condition I The licensee also committed in response to this violation to review i other electrical checklists to verify that the checklists accurately l reflected plant as-built conditions.. The NRC inspector reviewed . .!

selected items on the checklists to verify the checklists accurately reflected plant as-built conditions. The NRC inspector reviewed the ;

following procedures and the associated checklists:  ;

. 4.16-KV System, Normal Operation (Procedure 01-EE-1) ,

. 480-VoltSystem,NormalOperation(Procedure 01-EE-2)

. 125-Volt DC System, Normal Operation (Procedure 01-EE-3) -l Normal Operation of the 120-Volt AC System (Procedure 01-EE-4) I

.

. Normal Operation of TSC Electrical Supply, 480-Volt, 208-Volt, )

and 120-Volt (Procedure OI-EE-TSC-1)  !

? During review of the above procedures, the NRC inspector noted that Checklists EE-2-CL-8, C, and 0 provided a breaker position designated as "0." The NRC inspector noted that the actual positions shown on the electrical breakers were off and on and discussed with licensee personnel whether the "0" designation on the checklists indicated off l or on. During revision of the other checklists associated with the various electrical distribution systems, the licensee used a designation of "C" for closed and "0" for open; however, during revision of Checklists EE-2-CL-B, C, and 0, the licensee failed to use the "C" and "0" designation This item remains open pending the issuance of a revision to Checklists EE-2-CL-8, C, 0, and E to correct the anomalies discussed above, i

__i_i_..__^

F  ;

>

, 1

,

!

i (Closed) Deviation 285/8710-02: Failure to log missed operations surveillance tests on the shift turnover lo This deviation was related to the failure of the licensee to establish administrative control for logging missed operations surveillance

.

tests on the shift turnover log when the plant was in Modes 4 and In response to this deviation, the licensee created and issued a new shift turnover log, Form FC-95A, that would be used in Modes 4 and Form FC-95A will be used to document plant conditions and will also be used to log any operations surveillance tests that are not performed i when scheduled. In addition, the supervisor of operations issued a

'

memo to operations personnel to clarify the use of Form FC-95A during 3 Modes 4 and 5 to ensure that all operations personnel clearly understand the purpose of the new turnover lo The NRC inspector reviewed the actions taken by the licensee in response to.this deviation. No problems were noted during the revie (0 pen) Unresolved-Item 285/8715-03: Determination of the effect of l tendon grease on seismic gap fire seal i This~ item. concerned the secreting of tendon grease through the seismic gap fire seal at the northwest corner of the upper electrical penetration roo In response to this item, the licensee received verbal confirmation from the seal manufacturer that the grease would not degrade the material. However, this item will remain open pending a review of the manufacturer's written analysi . -Licensee Event Report (LER) Followup Through direct observation, discussions with licensee personnel, and review ;

'

of records, the following event reports were reviewed to determine that deportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with T The LERs listed below are closed:

87-021 Failure to remove an engineered safety function from bypass

,87-023 Radiation monitor out of service LER 87-021 identified and reported by the licensee, noted that the offsite power in normal priorlow to signal (0PLS)

exceeding was not a reactor removed coolant from by(RCS) pass and placed system temperature of 300 F. Table 2-3 of TS 2.15 requires that the OPLS be

,

E placed in normal prior to exceeding 300 F.

L

n

. .l

!

The licensee reviewed this event and determined.that the TS !

' requirement for placing 0PLS in normal had not been properly included l in the plant startup instructions provided in Procedure OP-1, " Master Checklist for Startup or Trip Recovery." Procedure 0P-1 stated that the OPLS should be placed in normal prior to exceeding 600 psia in the RCS, with a bubble in the pressurizer. At the time of discovery, the RCS pressure was greater than 600 psia and RCS temperature was 530' The licensee revised Procedure OP.-1_to properly implement the TS requirement. The procedure now requires that the OPLS be placed in

.

normal prior to exceeding a RCS. temperature of 300 F. The NRC inspector reviewed Procedure OP-1 to verify that the appropriate corrections had been made to prevent recurrence. The failure to place the OPLS switch in the normal position prior to exceeding 300'F RCS temperature had limited safety significance due to the low core decay heat and- the availability of both steam generators for decay heat '

removal. . The NRC inspector also reviewed other selected items in the TS to verify that the licensee had properly implemented the-requirements in the appropriate procedures. No problems were note The licensee issued LER 87-023 to report an event where the licensee failed to submit a report to the NRC regarding the inoperability of Radiation Monitors RM-063L, RM-063M, and RM-063H. TS 2.21 requires that a report be submitted if the monitors are inoperable for greater ;

than 7 day {

.

This LER was issued based on an NRC inspection performed on June 25, 1987, by a Region IV. health physics specialist. A violation.of the TS requirement for reporting the -inoperability of the monitors was issued in NRC Inspection Report 50-285/87-16. A review of the specific and generic aspects of the identified problem will be performed during l closecut of the violatio In response to this event to provide immediate corrective action to ;

prevent recurrence, the licensee revised Procedure 01-RC-3, " Reactor !

Coolant System Startup," to include a requirement for verification of '

the operability of the monitors prior to entering Mode 3. (TheNRC inspector reviewed Procedure 01-RC-3 and verified that the requirement had been properly included.) In addition, the Supervisor, Operations issued a memo to all operations personnel to stress the need for recording, in the station log, an entry into a limiting condition for operation (LC0). The recording of the LC0 in the station log will provide a means of tracking an LC0 to ensure that action is taken by the responsible individual to prepare and issue the required report The NRC inspector reviewed other selected TS requirements related to the preparation and issuance of special reports and the appropriate implementing procedures to verify that the TS requirements were properly implemented. No additional instances were note No violations or deviations were identified.

{

- ________

o 7 .

!

l . Operational Safety Verification The NRC. inspectors conductea reviewsand observations of selected activities to verify that facility ' operations were performed in conformance with tne requir~ements estab.11shed.under 10. CFR, administrative procedures, and the TSs. The NRC inspectors made several control room observations to verify the following:

. Proper shift staffing

. Operator adherence to approved procedures and TS requirements

. Operability of reactor protective system.and engineered safeguards equipment

. Logs, records, recorder' traces, annunciators, panel indications, and switch positions complied with the appropriate requirements ,

. Proper return to service of components

. Maintenance orders (M0) initiated for equipment in need of maintenance

. Appropriate conduct of control room and other licensed operators

. Management personnel toured the control room on a regular basis !

No violations or deviations were identifie . Plant Tours

.The NRC inspectors conducted plant tours at various times to assess plant J and equipment conditions. The following items were observed during the tours:

. General plant conditions, including operability of standby equipment, were satisfactor . Equipment was being maintained in proper condition, without fluid leaks and excessive vibratio '

!

. Plant housekeeping and cleanliness practices were observed, including no fire hazards and the control of combustible materia f . Performance of work activities was in act.ordance with approved procedure . Portable gas cylinders were properly stored to prevent possible

'

missile hazard !

l . Tag out of equipment was performed properl ;

[

. ' _ _ _ __ __

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

_ _

.

,

. , o

'

.c

I

. Management personnel toured the operating spaces on a regular basi During tours of the plant, the following items were identified: l

. Fire Door 989-9 was found on two occasions to be unlatched. The 1 unlatched fire door made the fire barrier nonfunctional. No time could be established as to how long the fire door was unlatched; therefore, a determination for the need of a fire watch could not be established. The licensee continued to experience problems with maintaining fire barriers functional during this inspection perio .During the previous five inspection periods, the NRC inspector noted ;

f additional examples of the failure by the licensee to maintain fire barriers functional due to unlatched fire doors. Licensee management should take whatever action is appropriate to establish and maintain the plant fire barriers in a fully functional statu . Plant housekeeping in the auxiliary building was in need of additional-licensee attention. Material had accumulated outside the personnel airlock and in Room 59 after plant startup from the refueling outag No violations or deviations were identifie . Safety-Related System Walkdown The NRC inspector walked down accessible portions of the following safety-related system to verify system operability. Operability was-determined by verification of selected breaker positions. The system was walked down using the drawing and procedure note .- 480-Vac electrical distribution system (Drawing FSAR Figure 8.1-1, Revision 31 and Procedure 01-EE-2, Checklist 01-EE-2-CL-E, Revision 11)

This system walkdown was performed to review the licensee's actions taken in response to Violation 285/8702-03. The violation was not closed based on the results of the walkdown. See paragraph 2.2 for a discussion of the results of the review. Discrepancies were noted between the plant as-built condition and Checklist 01-EE-2-CL-E; however, none of the conditions noted ,

affected the operability of any safety-related equipment. No discrepancies l were noted between the plant as-built conditions and FSAR Figure 8.1- No violations or deviations were identifie . Monthly Maintenance Observations The NRC inspector reviewed and/or observed selected station maintenance activities on safety-related systems and components to verify the maintenance was conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory requirements, and the TSs. The following items were considered during the reviews and/or observations:

- - - - - _ - _ _ _

__- . . , . . .

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

-

. .

f

!

\

'

. -The TS-limiting conditions for operation were met while systems or ,

components were removed from servic l

.. Approvals were obtained prior to initiating the wor . Activities were accomplished using approved M0s.and were inspected, as applicabl . Functional' testing and/or calibrations.were performed prior to returning components or systems to servic . ' Quality control records were maintaine .i

. Activities were accomplished by qualified personne . Parts-and materials used were properly certifie . Radiological and fire prevention controls were implemente The NRC inspector reviewed and/or observed the following maintenance activities:

. . Repair of a packing gland leak on the turbine-driven auxiliary

_

feedwater pump steam supply valve (M0873009)

. Repairoffueloilstoragetanklevelgage(M0873829)

. Troubleshooting and repair of an RCS cold leg temperature indicator (M0873018)

. Replacement of packing in Valve HCV-315 (M0 871044)  !

. Adjustment of a control element assembly upper limit switch (M0873074)

. Replacement of packing in Valve RC-131 (M0 871128)

, i No violations or-deviations were identif'ie i Monthly Surveillance Observations L The NRC inspector observed selected portions of the performance of and/or l

reviewed completed documentation for the TS-required surveillance testing on safety-related systems and components. The NRC inspector verified the

'

following items during the testing:

. Testing was performed by qualified personnel using approved procedure . Test instrumentation was calibrate . The TS limiting conditions for operation were me _ _ _ _ .

'.' - m'u '

E.

L

,

,

,

iW' .

,y

..

31 .

f-

.'[, 3 s

,

t

'

t-

s

. Removal and restoration of the affected system and/or component were

'

i accomplishe . Test results conformed with TS and procedure' requirement . Test results were reviewed by personnel other thor, the individual directing the tes .1

,

. Deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and- ,

resolved by appropriate management personne j

'

The NRC inspector observed and/or reviewed the documentation.for the

'

n following surveillance test activities. The procedures used for the test  !

activities are noted.'in parenthesi '

. Monthly test of a ' emergency diesel generator (ST-ESF-6)

.. High pressurizer pressure. channel checks.(ST-RPS-5)

. Safety injection / containment spray pump checks (ST-SI/C5-1)

. Subcooled margin monitor meter check (ST-SMM-1) '

,

. Rawwaterpumpinserviceinspection(ST-ISI-RW-~3)__

No violations or deviations were identifie . Security Observations

'

The NRC inspectors verified the physical security plan was being '

implemented by selected observation of the following items:

. The security organization was properly manne . Personnel within the protected area (PA) displayed their identification badge . Vehicles were properly authorized, searched, and escorted or controlled within the P . Persons and packages were properly cleared and checked before entry j into the PA was permitte l

.

The effectiveness of the security program was maintained when security  !

'

equipment failure or impairment required compensatory measures to be employed .

.

The PA barrier was maintained and the isolation zone kept free of l transient materia > ,

c

.

The vital area barriers were maintained and not. compromised by breaches or weaknesse .

Illumination in the PA was adequate to observe the appropriate areas

'

at nigh Q .: g

-

n

\

9' 11

'

. Security monitors at.the secondary and central alarm stations were functioning properly for assessment of.possible intrusion No violations or deviations were identified.

h

"

h 10. Radiological Protection 0 observations l The NRC inspectors verified that selected activities of the licensee'::

radiological protection program were implemented in conformance with the facility policies and procedures and in compliance with regulatory 1 requirements.. The activities listed below were observed and/or reviewed:

~, . Health physics (HP) supervisory personnel conducted plant tours to check on activities in progres . Radiation work permits contained.the appropriate information to ensure

' work was perfonnedlin a safe and controlled manne . : Personnel in radiation controlled areas (RCA) were wearing the required personnel monitoring' equipment and protective clothin . Radiation and/or contaminated areas were properly posted and controlled based on the~ activity levels within the are '

. Personnel properly frisked prior to exiting an RC No violations or deviations were identifie I 11.. In-Office Review of Periodic and Special Reports In-office review of periodic and special reports was performed by the _NRC '

resident inspector and/or the Fort Calhoun project inspector to verify the following, as appropriate:

. Reports included the information required by appropriate NRC requirement . Test results and supporting information were consistent with design predictions and specification .. Determination that planned correctivo actions were adequate for resolution of identified problem . Determination as to whether any information contained in the report should be classified as an abnormal occurrenc The NPC inspectors reviewed the following:

. Monthly operations report for June 1987, undated ,

. June monthly operating report, dated July 13, 1987  !

..'

. Monthly operations report for July 1987, undated

<

i

r ,

,p ,

.. ,

.-

. .

.

During review of reports, NRC personnel identified a 10 CFR'Part 21 report submitted by suppliers or vendors that appeared .to be applicable to the licensee's' facility. The NRC resident inspector provided a copy of the repot t. to the plant licensing engineer for-review of . applicability by the licensee. The report provided is listed below:

l . A letter dated. June 5,1987, from the Public Service Company of i Colorado related to the air-start motors on the emergency diesel l generator l

'

'

No violations or deviations were identifie i 12. Review of' Allegations  !

The NRC inspector reviewed an allegation (Reference 4-86-A-127) during this inspection period as discussed below: l This allegation was received by the NRC and that stated safety-related valves were being repacked with valve packing, other than the packin !

recommended by the valve manufacturer, without. prior engineering review'and approva The NRC inspector noted, through the review of M0s that were issued during the last refueling outage, that the licensee had repacked ;

various safety-related valves with packing'other than the-type recommended by the manufacturer. The NRC inspector reviewed two memos that had been issued by the licensee to address the use of an alternate type of valve packing. One memo waw prepared and issued by the plant engineering group'to establish an alternate packing and the other by the technical services group to address the affect of the alternate packing on valve operation. Based on the review performed :

by the NRC inspector, it appeared that the licensee had performed an adequdte engineering evaluation for the use of a valve packing other than the type specified by the valve manufacturer. For this reason, this allegation was not substantiated, This allegation was also related to a rumor that the fuel assemblies received just prior to the 1985 refueling outage could not pass QC inspection. A review was performed to verify that the fuel assemblies loaded into the vessel during the 1985 refueling outage was satisfactory for continued plant use, ,

The fuel assemblies received in 1985 were loaded'into the core and '

used during Cycle 10. During Cycle 10, the licensee noted, through chemical analysis of the primary coolant, that one or more fuel assemblies were leaking. To determine which assemblies were leaking, the licensee offloaded all fuel assemblies at the end of Cycle 10 and performed ultrasonic testing (UT) on each assembly. All fuel assemblies received during 1985 were included in the UT progra l

/

d t

_

( ,

..

[

!

,

>

b 13 l

, DuringiUT of the assemblies, the licensee noted that three were found l to be leaking. None of the three assemblies were onesLthat were received during 198 i The NRC inspector reviewed the records of the testing performed and

'

l l verified that none of.the assemblies were the ones received in 198 The performance of the'UT by the licensee was considered to'be a better indicator of the structural integrity of the assemblies than !

.could be established by a visual inspection of the fuel at the time'of l receipt. For this reason, it appeared that the assemblies received-

'

during' L985 were satisfactory for continued plant use. This allegation could nbt be substantiated regarding improper fuel receip No violations of deviations were identified.-

L l-

,_

1 Nonroutine Reporting Program The purpose of this inspection was to verify whether administrative controls have been established for the review and evaluation of nonroutine operating events, and vendor bulletins and circular The NRC inspector reviewed procedures and interviewed personnel to verify

<

that administrative ~ controls have been established for:

I l a

. The review and evaluation of off normal events to assure {

. 3 - g t' identification of safety-related events

t .

'

The review of maintenance and surveillance activities to assure j identification of prospective or actual violations of Technical Specifications limiting condition for operation requirements :

r

. Reporting safety-related events internally and.to the NRC h, .- Completion of corrective actions relating to safety-related operating

!

events l

;}

^'

.

The recognition and reporting of events covered by 10 CFR Part 21

. The review and evaluation of vendor bulletins and circulars I

.The following procedures were reviewed:

.

Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (H-2, Revision 1)

.

Nonconformance Control (S0-G-18, Revision 10)

)

j

.

Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance to the Nuclear Regulatory i Commission (S0-G-42, Revision 7)

_ - . - - _ _ _ _ _ _

, ..

..

14 l

. Control of Vendor Manuals (50-G-62, Revision 3) ,

,, Operating Incident Reporti (S0-R-4, Revision'11)

..

-

10,CFR21,)ReportingofDefectsandNoncompliances(QADP-19,

)

Revision 3

,, <

In. addition, the NRC inspector reviewed Internal Audit Report No. 47, 10 CFR 21 Reporting,- dated January 22,198 It appears that the licensee.has-an adequate program to-identify, report, and correct nonroutine events.; The actual implementation of this program will-be reviewed during subsequent inspectio No violations o'r deviations were identified. .

1. 14 Annual Emergency Exercise During this inspection period, an annual emergency exercise was held by the NRC to evaluate-the licensee's ability to respond to emergency conditio The results of the exercise'are provided in NRC Inspection Report 50-285/87-19, 15. Exit Interview The NRC ins

. Production)pectors and other met with M members R. of the Andrews licensee staff(Division Manager, at the end'of this Nuclear inspection. At this meeting, the NRC inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection.and the finding .

!

v - _ _ - - _ _ _ _