IR 05000302/1977023
| ML19308D560 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/1977 |
| From: | Alderson C, Burke D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19308D556 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-77-23, NUDOCS 8002280989 | |
| Download: ML19308D560 (4) | |
Text
e a
r3
.
UNITED STATES
'
- # 88 44
-
A yf_
o,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
\\
R EGIOed 11
)
o
$
230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SulTE 1217
. I AYLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
-
o Y'+,.'.....o Report No.: 50-302/77-23 Docket No.: 50-302 License No.: DPR-72 Licensee: Florida Power Corporat.: m 3201 34th Street South St. Petersburg, Florida 33733
-
Inspection at: Crystal River site, Crystal River, Florida Inspection conducted: November 29 - December 2, 1977 Inspector:
D. J. Burke
'
.
-J Reviewed by:
[k #
/z-n_ ?J C. E. Alderson, Actiftg Chief Date
.
Nuclear Support Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Siipport Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on November 29-December 2, 1977 (Report No. 50-302/77-23)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of procurement, reviews and audits, and certain plant operations. The inspection involved 23 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results:
In the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were found.
l i
8002 280 9Pp
!
I 1U
-
__
. -. -.---
-
.
&
O
~r)
\\
.
,
j RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-23 I-1
_
!
DETAILS I Prepared by: [. /.
32, n.N /77
,-
'
/Da(e D.J/e/'urke,ReactorInspector Nucl ar Support Section No. 2
Reactor Operations.and Nuclear Support Branch Dates of Inspection: November 29-December 2, 1977-m-Reviewed by:~-
/
n._ /,, /? 7 e
.%
C. E. Alderso'n, Acdtng Chief Date Nuclear Support Section No. 2
~.2 actor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch 1.
Persons Contacted
- G. P. Beatty, Jr., Nuclear Plant Manager
- J. L. Harrison, Assistant Chem / Rad Protection Engineer
- D. W. Pedrick IV, Compliance Engineer
- C. G. Goering, Compliance Auditor
['"
- J. Cooper, Compliance Auditor i
T. Montrief, CR3 Storekeeper
- Denotes those attending er.it interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
3.
Unresolved Items No new unresolved items were disclosed during this inspection.
4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph
'
1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 2, 1977. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
5.
Reviews and Audits The inspector reviewed certain Plant Review Committee (PRC) meeting minutes, plant compliance (P0QAM) audit reports, and corporate QA (QP) audit reports for 1977. The off-site Nuclear General Review Committee (NGRC) reviews and audits were not inspected at this Q
-
-
.
,,- _
.
_
.
_...
..
-_
_ _ _ _
- -.------
- - - - - - - _-_
i
-
m.
-
t
a
i m
s
/
RII Rpt.-No. 50-302/77-23 I-2
.
l.
time. The documents and reports' described above were compared to
!
the requirements of Technical Specification 6.5.1 and the provisions j.
of ANSI N18.7-1976, " Administrative Controls and Q.". for the Operational
'
Phase of Nuclear Power Plants." Within the areas inspected, no j
items of noncompliance or deviations were disclosed.
During review of the PRC meeting minutes, the inspector noted
isolated occasions when alternata PRC members were not specifically l
identified as alternates in the minutes, however, delegation of authority forms did properly identify them. The licensee stated that, in the future, he would identify the alternates as such in j
the PRC meeting minutes.
t i
The on-site P0QAM audits are performed by the plant Compliance Section. During review of these audits, the inspector noted that
.
some six audits were performed during the first half of 1977,.
i however, no Compliance Section audits have been performed since May. The P0QAM audits were suspended due to workload and training.
The licensee stated that he plans to reschedule compliance audits as soon as possible. The procedure for compliance audit of plant
,
l functions (CP-110) requires the Compliance Section to prepare
_
,
proposed audit schedules each calendar quarter; prior to the end of
this. spection, the licensee issued a letter stating that no compliance audits will be scheduled for the fourth quartei. The
}
Compliance Section is currently reviewing the plant periodic surieillance l
test program. The inspector had no further questions at this time; the P0QAM audits will be inspected when they resume.
6.
Procurement The inspector reviewed the licensee's QA and procurement program to j
verify that safety-related components, materials and supplies were properly purchased, received, stored, and handled. The program, and its implementation, were compared to the requirements of Technical Specification 6.8.1, ANSI N18.7-1976, ANSI N45.2.2-1972, ANSI N45.2.13-
,
1976, and Regulatory Guides 1.33, 1.38, and 1.39.
Within the areas
inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were disclosed.
i
!
Although the licensee is still in the process of formulating his
!
detailed "Q-list" of safety-related items, the inspector noted that the various items selected for review were properly classified, and thus procured, inspected, stored, and handled properly. The boration chemicals have been added to the Q-list, so the purchase orders i
contained the appropriate specifications and certifications, however,
'
the sodium hydroxide solution is not on the Q-list.
Since diluted sodium hydroxide is used in the containment spray systems, the licensee stated'that he would consider placing the sodium hydroxide
)
on the Q-list and requiring chemical certifications or sampling the
>
l solution for chemical content (e.g. - chlorides).
.
.---y.--y-*
y
,g e
, -, - -
e,
,-
,-4
.
,m
,
r,,
, _ _,, -
--.m-.e
,m m.%.,%.
.,n,,
,.. -,,
-,aw,,-.7-
. -.
,,y
.....
-y
,%,%-
. _. _
.
mm.,
h
-~
.
.4 t
';
G,
/
-~s, RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-23 I-3
.
Units 1, 2, and 3 spare parts and materials are stored in the same warehouse, but the Unit 3 " quality" items are distinctly tagged.
The licensee stated that he is considering moving the Unit 3 parts and materials to a separate warehouse. The inspector also verified that the parts and materials selected were supplied by qualified and approved vendors. The inspector had no further questions.
7.
General Plant Tour The inspector. toured the reactor control room and other plant areas; certain nuclear and process instrumentation indications and alarms were reviewed and no discrepancies were identified. The inspector had no further questions.
J
l
~
,
.I I
i e
i
I
.-
. -.
.
.
..
_
-
._-