IR 05000285/1993014
| ML20046A384 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1993 |
| From: | Powers D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20046A380 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-93-14, NUDOCS 9307280024 | |
| Download: ML20046A384 (12) | |
Text
4 i-APPENDIX l
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
'
l Inspection Report:
50-285/93-14 l
Operating License: DRP-40 l
l Licensee: Omaha Public Power District
!
444 South 16th Street Mall Mail Stop BE/EP 4
!
Omaha, Nebraska 68102-2247 Facility Name:
Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Station Inspection At:
Fort Calhoun, NE Inspection Conducted:
June 7-11, 1993, and June 21-28, 1993 Inspectors:
D. L. Kelley, Reactor Inspector, Maintenance Section, Division of Reactor Safety
!
C. E. Johnson, Reactor Inspector, Maintenance Section, Division l
of Reactor Safety
l M/23/13
/
Approved:
h l
Dr. Dale A. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Section Date
'
Division of Reactor Safety Inspection Summary Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of maintenance implementation, observation of work activities and records review.
Results:
!
Maintenance procedures and instructions reviewed, provided sufficient
detail and conformed to the licensee's administrative requirements (Section 2.1.2).
!
Maintenance records were available for review, but were not easily
retrievable (Section 2.1.2).
!
The licensee was effectively implementing the maintenance program
'
(Section 2.1.2).
The work activities observed were performed in a controlled and
l professional manner (Sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.2).
9307280024 930723~
PDR ADOCK 05000295 l
G PDR
\\
,
.
-2-Maintenance activities performed on electrical components and
instrumentation were well-planned (Sections 3.3.2).
Summar_y of Inspection Findings:
Inspection Followup Item 285/9208-01 was closed (Section 4).
- Licensee Event Report 92-018 was closed (Section 5).
- ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Persons Contacted and Exit Meeting
Attachment 2 - Documents Reviewed
-
-.
_ -...
_.
-
.
. -
-...
_
-
-
- --
- _. - -.
..
. -
.
.
-3-DETAILS 1 PLANT STATUS'
-
I During this inspection period,-the plant'was operating at-100 percent power.
The plant tripped from' full power on June:24, 1993.
]
2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION (62700)_
_
The purpose of this' inspection was to determine whether the licensee's maintenance program was being implemented in accordance with. regulatory requirements; to determine the effectiveness of the maintenance program on i
important plant equipment; and to determine if the maintenance staff was implementing an effective maintenance program.
2.1 Components Selected for Review.
2.1.1 Discussion In determining the specific components, systems, or areas to inspect,.the inspectors reviewed the operating history of selected plant equipment and discussed with plant personnel completed maintenance activities..The I
inspectors selected three. safety-related components and one nonsafety-related j
component for review. The inspectors also observed maintenance ~ activities
- 1 performed on Component Cooling Water Heat Exchanger AC-1A.
Components selected for review are listed below:
Containment Spray Pump (SI-3B),
Auxiliary Pressurizer Spray Valve (HCV-240),
Charging Pump (CH-1A), and
Electrohydraulic Control (EHC) System.
- The inspectors selected various maintenance procedures included or referenced in the maintenance work packages and determined that:
Maintenance procedures conformed to-the licensee's administrative
requirements, except for format. Not all procedures had been revised to conform to the new format. Updating procedure. format was an ongoing process; i
Quality control hold points were identified in the procedures or work
instructions included in the maintenance work packages; and Considerations were given to radiological, temperature, pressure, and
electrical hazards, as appropriate.
<
v--
+
,
w s-v
-,
,,mr..
--,
w w%.-,,,
i.., - -
.,--,,,-v,
- tv-,--,
-,vw-
,,, -*
___
.
.
-4-The procedures and instructions that were reviewed, provided sufficient detail and conformed to the licensee's administrative requirements.
The inspectors selected completed maintenance records of the activities associated with the components selected above and determined the following:
Procedures and instructions included in the maintenance work packages
were adequate for the work that was performed; Vendor maintenance recommendations, when used, were correctly translated
into or referenced by the mainter.ance procedure or instructions included in the maintenance work packages; Required administrative approvals were obtained prior to initiating
work; Approved procedures were used where the maintenance activities were
complex and appeared to exceed the normal skills of the maintenance personnel; The cause of the failure of components selected was evaluated, and
adequate corrective action was taken to reduce the probability of recurrence; Records indicated that equipment was properly tagged out when removed
from service; j
Measuring and test equipment used was identified and in calibration; e
Quality control hold points were signed or initialed indicating that
work was performed in accordance with the licensee's quality requirements; and i
Post-maintenance testing and adjustments, as necessary, were completed
'
e before returning the equipment back to service.
The inspectors selected for review preventive maintenance records and surveillance test records for the components chosen.
Review of the preventive maintenance records showed that preventive maintenances were performed as required and within the stated time frequencies. The inspectors compared the preventive maintenance requirements with vendor recommendations and found that vendor recommendations were properly translated into preventive maintenance procedures or instructions. The inspectors also reviewed inservice inspection and inservice test records, which were developed during quarterly or annual surveillance tests performed by operations.
Surveillance tests were conducted as required, and inservice inspection and/or testing was performed after repair or replacement of components.
_
.
-
_
.~-
.
.
-5-l Maintenance records were available for review but were not easily retrievable in all cases, because records were kept at the site for a given period of time, then transferred to the records maintenance facility located in the Omaha office where they were placed on microfilm. Maintenance records and tests were reviewed and found to be complete.
The inspectors obseeved the licensee perform maintenance work on Component Cooling Water Heat Erchanger AC-1A.
This heat exchanger required maintenance because a performanus test indicated increased fouling and tube-side pressure drop. The raw wate ride of the heat exchanger was cleaned by abrasive blasting and coate; with an epoxy coating.
The inspectors observed maintenance personnel replace and properly align the north end cover plate and apply the required torque and sequence of torquing during installation.
Quality control inspectors witnessed the installation of the component cooling i
water cover plate and initialed the required quality control holdpoints.
The maintenance work was observed by the inspectors to be performed in accordance with procedures and work instructions included in the maintenance work order. The work activities were performed in a controlled and professional manner.
No discrepancies were noted.
2.1.2 Conclusions Procedures and instructions reviewed, provided sufficient detail and conformed to the licensee's administrative requirements.
Preventive maintenances were performed as required and within the stated time frequencies.
Surveillance tests were conducted as required, and inservice inspection and/or testing was performed after repair or replacement of components.
Maintenance records were available for review, but were not easily retrievable. Maintenance work was observed by the inspectors to be performed in accordance with procedures and work instructions.
For the components and maintenance activities reviewed, the licensee's maintenance program was being effectively implemented in accordance with regulatory requirements.
3 INSTRUMENTATION AND ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE (COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS)
OBSERVATION OF WORK, AND REVIEW OF QUALITY RECORDS (62704 and 62705)
3.1 Observation of Instrumentation Maintenance The purpose of this portion of the inspection was to assess the licensee's performance of instrumentation and control work activities by direct observation of work.
.
-
.
.___ - ___
l-6-3.1.1 Discussion The inspectors observed the licensee's troubleshooting activities of the audio l
count-rate circuitry. This problem was initially identified in a Fuel l
Integrity and Reactor Subcriticality (FIRS) inspection (50-285/92-03) during which the inspectors noted that the speaker was not audible in containment while core alterations were underway.
Initially, the licensee thought that incorrect speaker impedence was the problem.
However, it was determined that correcting the impedence did not improve the volume of the audio count-rate speaker. Since then the licensee has continued to toubleshoot to determine
,
the problem. The current work consisted of checking the various components l
and wiring circuits associated with the speaker circuitry from the control I
room panel to the containment building.
The work was accomplished under Maintenance Work Order 930409. The inspectors reviewed the work package and observed the instrument and control technician perform the troubleshooting activities.
The maintenance work order instructions were definitive enough to control the work activities, yet were flexible enough to allow the various troubleshooting activities to be accomplished without risk to any safety functions or personnel.
The instrument and control technician appeared very knowledgeable and kept the control room operators informed of the various troubleshooting steps which
,
might affect indications or alarms. The troubleshooting was performed in a t
very logical and thorough manner. All steps were completed on the circuits outside the containment building and the system returned to operation in l
accordance with instructions.
However, the root cause of the problem was not identified.
j 3.1.2 Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the work had been thoroughly planned, reviewed
,
and performed. The instrumentation and control technician appeared very well l
trained and experienced. The work was conducted in a very precise and professional manner.
,
!
l 3.2 Observation of Electrical Maintenance l
The purpose of this portion of the inspection was to assess the licensee's l
performance of electrical maintenance work activities by direct observation of work.
i 3.2.1 Discussion l
l The inspectors observed the wprk activities associated with Work (
Package MR-FC-89-013. The work involved the inspection and installation of l
Bus Tie Breaker BT-184C, which had been refurbished by the vendor.
The work package contained detailed instructions and approved procedures for pre-checks, preventive maintenance, and calibration.
The inspectors reviewed the procedure and noted that all approvals had been obtained.
The inspectors i
I
.
.
.
-7-verified that all test instrumentation had been checked and was in the current calibration period. Two electricians were involved in the work. The lead electrician was experienced and knowledgeable, and the other electrician was in on-the-job training to become qualified to perform the specific work functions.
The process of pre-checks, preventive maintenance, calibration, breaker installation, and functional testing was time consuming due to the complexity and detail of the work performed. Another factor was the inclusion of the on-the-job training. The inspectors noted that the lead electrician thoroughly involved the learning electrician in the work activities. The inspectors determined through continuous observation that the complex work was performed in a very professional manner. There was close coordination with the control room operator and the shift supervisor during the installation and testing phase of the work activity.
3.2.2 Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the work control documents were very precise and detailed. The work activity was accomplished in a professional manner by qualified personnel.
In addition,'the on-the-job training observed by the inspectors was considered good and an asset to the ongoing training of personnel.
3.3 Completed Work Document Review 3.3.1 Discussion The inspectors selected completed maintenance records (identified in Attachment 2) of the activities associated with completed instrumentation and control, and electrical corrective maintenance activities to determine the following:
Procedures and instructions included in the maintenance work packages
were adequate for the work that was performed; Vendor maintenance recommendations, when used, were correctly translated e
into or referenced by the maintenance procedures or instructions included in the maintenance work packages; Required administrative approvals were obtained prior to initiating
work; Approved procedures were used where the maintenance activities were e
complex and appeared to exceed the normal skills of the maintenance personnel;
_
,
.,
.
i
.
'
.
l-8-The cause of the failure of components selected for review was
evaluated, and adequate corrective action was taken to reduce the probability of_ recurrence; Equipment was properly tagged out when removed from service;
Measuring and test equipreent used was identified and in calibration;
Quality control holdpoints were signed or initialed indicating that work
was performed in accordance with the licensee's requirements; and
'
Post-maintenance testing and adjustments, as necessary, were completed
before returning the equipment back to service.
The work documents reviewed were very detailed. Where pre-approved procedures j
were not used, the instructions in the work package were logical and precise.
.
The work planning was very oetailed.
For example, all approvals were listed, all drawings were current and listed, tagouts were specified, and required
'
Technical Specifications were listed. Also, all post-maintenance testing for return to operation was listed. The inspectors noted that each maintenance work order contained a planner checkoff sheet and system engineering' review requirements. The inspectors identified no weaknesses in the reviewed work packages.
3.3.2 Conclusions The inspectors' overall conclusion, based on document review, was that the work process was very well executed. Although no program review was i
'
conducted, the detail and control exhibited by the work documents indicated a well-planned work control program.
4 FOLLOWUP (92701)
(Closed) Inspection Followup Item (285/9208-01):
Boric Acid Corrosion / Leakage Prevention l
This item identified a lack of overall, systematic, or coordinated control of i
the boric acid leakage prevention program. The inspectors concluded that such a prevention program did exist and was administered through the various system engineers but that no coordinated control existed.
In response to this item, the licensee formalized a program plan and a program charter addressing objectives of the boric acid corrosion prevention program (charter) and the details for implementing the program (plan). A Boric Acid Corrosion Prevention Program Engineer has been assigned to coordinate the l
activities.
In addition, a new " Borated Water Leak" Evaluation Form FC-1276 has been written and was being used to track and repair leaks.
I 5 ONSITE REVIEW OF LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS (92700)
,
l l
!
- -,,
.
.
-
_-
..
.
- - -
- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - - -
.
.
-9-
,
(Closed) LER 92-018: Corrosion of Boric Acid System' Bolts
<
On March 20, 1992, during the performance of Modification MR-FC-89-076, carbon steel U-bolts and boric acid pump flange bolts were discovered corroded when the piping insulation was removed. -The engineering evaluation determined that ddring a hypothetical design-basis seismic event the flange could have failed with the potential -for. a complete. loss of the inventory of the boric acid storage tanks. The root cause of this problem was that the original design of the system did not anticipate corrosion problems from boric acid leakage at the system flanges.
The actions taken'by the licensee included:
The immediate replacementof the degraded. fasteners with new carbon steel
.
,
fasteners; Affected components in the boric acid system that.were not in the boric
acid corrosion prevention program, were decided to be added to the program;.
Review the scope of the boric acid corrosion prevention program to
ensure that equipment in other borated water systems were not similarly
-
affected _ by unidentified leakage; and The performance of an engineering evaluation to determine the
.
acceptability of replacing the carbon steel flange bolts'with stainless steel bolts.
The licensee's progress to date was that:
The study has been completed, and 15 inspection sites in the boric acid
system have been added to the scope of the boric acid corrosion prevention program; The review of other borated water systems has been completed, and it was
determined that unidentified or " hidden" leakage was not a factor in these systems; and Stainless steel fasteners will be used to replace the carbon steel
flange bolts.
_
.
..
_. _.. _.._,...,_ _. _,_.. -
-
._
.
.-
.
---
,
- -. -
_
.
i I
.
ATTACHMENT 1 1 PERSONS CONTACTED 1.1 Licensee Personnel
- R. Andrews, Division Manager, Nuclear Services D. Bannister, Operations Engineer M. Brady, Administrator, Preventive Maintenance
- J. Chase, Plant Manager
- G. Cook, Supervisor, Station Licensing
- S. Gambhir, Division Manager, Production Engineering
- J. Gasper, Manager, Training
- W. Gates, Vice President
.
R. Jaworski, Manager, Station Engineering.
- R. Johansen, Supervisor, Maintenance Support j
- W. Jones, Senior Vice President
- j D. Lippy, Engineer, Station Licensing
'
B. Hierzejewski, System Engineer i
K. Naser, System Engineer
- W. Orr, Manager, Quality. Assurance / Quality Control
- T. Patterson, Division Manager, Nuclear Operations
- R. Phelps, Manager, Design Engineering
- H. Sefick, Manager, Security Services l
- R. Short, Manager, Nuclear Licensing and Industrial Affairs C. Simmons, Engineer, Station Licensing
'
1.2 NRC Personnel R. P. Mullikin, Senior Resident Inspector -
In addition to the personnel listed above, the inspectors contacted other l
personnel during this inspection period.
l
- Denotes personnel that attended the exit meeting.
!
'
2 EXIT MEETING An exit meeting was conducted on June 28, 1993. During this meeting the inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any information provided to, or reviewed by, the inspectors.
,
l l
l'
I l
l l
I
-.....,-..-.,.-m,,#
-. -. _ - _..
..-..
-
_-.
_
-
. --
. - -
--
!
~
?
- .
ATTACHMENT 2
'
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED SURVEILLANCE TEST PROCEDURES
'
IC-ST-0024, " Channel Calibration Safety Injection Tank 6D Pressure Switch,"-
-
Revision 2 IC-ST-TM-0003, " Monthly Calib' ration Of Chlorine Monitor," Revision 5 l
!
OP-ST-DG-0002, " Diesel Generator (DG-2) Check," Revision 8 EM-ST-ESF-0001, "ESF Offsite Power Low Signal Sensor Check," Revision 4 OP-ST-SI-3008, " Safety Injection And Containment Spray Pumps And Valve Inservice Inspection," Revision 8 OP-ST-CH-3003, " Chemical Volume & Control System Pump Inservice Test,"
Revision 6 I
OP-ST-CH-3005, " Chemical Volume & Control System Category A and B Valve l
Exercise Test," Revision 1
OP-ST-VX-3009, " Chemical Volume & Control System Remote Position Indicator-TE," Revision 0 l
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS (PMO)
l PM0 9201454 PM0 9106929
,
PM0 9201455-PM0 9107225 l
PM0 9000758 PM0 9000757 MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS (MWO)
MWO 930620 MWO 921882 MWO 931131 MWO 931120 MWO 921464 MWO 931132 MWO 895713 MWO 921925-MWO 931133 MWO 921883 MWO 912660 MWO 931134 MWO 911640 MWO 900968 MWO 921468
,
!
MWO 921568 MWO 922778 MWO 924145 MWO 930491 MWO 930505 MWO 930820 MWO 930862 MWO 930447 MWO 924435 MWO 924434 MWO 922266 MWO 920677 MWO 910266 MWO 931313 STANDING ORDERS (S0)
S0-G-18, " Operational Nonconformance Reports," Revision 20 S0-R-4, " Station Incident Reports," Revision 39 S0-G-23, " Surveillance Test Program," Revision 39 S0-M-2, " Preventive Maintenance Program," Revision 22-
.
-2-S0-M-101, " Maintenance Work Control," Revision 24 S0-G-82, " Engineering Assistance Requests," Revision 1 S0-M-102, " Post-Maintenance Testing," Revision 6 S0-M-100, " Conduct Of Maintenance," Revision 18 QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL QAM-20, " Control Of Internal Deficiencies And Corrective Action," Revision 4 STATION ENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS (SEI)
SEI-4, " Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System Failure Analysis Report,"
Revision 2 SEI-19, " System Review, Trending and Reporting," Revision 4 ENGINEERING INSTRUCTION (GEI)
GEI-55, " Instruction For ASME Section XI Repair and Replacement Plans,"
Revision 0 FOLLOWUP ITEMS LER 92-018, " Boric Acid Corrosion of Boric Acid System Bolts" IFI 285/9208-01, " Boric Acid Corrosion / Leakage Prevention"
_
_