IR 05000302/1979055
| ML19323G735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1980 |
| From: | Martin R, Quick D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323G731 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-79-55, NUDOCS 8006060568 | |
| Download: ML19323G735 (4) | |
Text
.....
...... -. -. - - - - -
- - - - - -
. - - -
--
.
f%
'
o,,
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
'
$
E REGION 11
o 101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100
g,.....,o ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-302/79-55
'
Licensee: Florida Power Corporation 3201 34th Street, South St. Petersburg, FL 33733 Facility Name:
Crystal River 3 Docket No.
50-302 License No. DPR-72 Inspection at Crystal iver site near Crystal River, Florida Inspected by:
[
{ f ed d ff D. R.'Quic ()
Dat6 Sifned
'~
Approved by:
(
he T/~2 N
~
R. D. Martin, Section Chief, RONS Branch Date' Sig6ed SUhMARY Inspection on December 10-14, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 33 inspector-hours on site in the areas of review of operations, followup of previously identified items, and followup of IE Bulletins.
Results Of the 3 areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified i
in 2 areas; 1 item of noncompliance was found in 1 area.
(Improper maintenance
of housekeeping requirements - Infraction - Paragraph 5.f).
.
i
'
,
l 80 0606Cd'(o F
~
Q
.
,...
.
--
_____ - _ _ _ - _ - _ -
- - - ~. - - - - -
-. -
.
.
.
ty
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. C. Poole, Nuclear Plant Manager
- P. F. McKee, Operations Superintendent
- B. E. Crane, Planning Engineer
- H. B. Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
- J. R. Wright, Chem / Rad Protection Engineer
- L. B.
Tittle, Results Engineer
- J. Cooper, Jr., QA/QC manager
- K. F. Lancaster, Compliance Auditor
- R. W. Kennedy, QA Supervisor J. Kraiker, Shift Supervisor H. Embach, Shift Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted included 2 technicians, 6 operators, 2 mechanics and 3 office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 14, 1979 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 aboVe. The details of the noncompli-ance concerning housekeeping (paragraph 5.f) was also discussed.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Unresolved Item 79-40-01, Hurricane Preparedness The inspector reviewed documentation which supported the effort in this area to date. The following action has been taken to clarify this issue:
Unit I and 2 management was apprised of the debris problem by letter.
a.
Unit I and 2 management acknowledged and has committed to a general cleanup program for the areas around units 1 and 2.
b.
A request for engineering assistance (REI-79-8-21) has been initiated to resolve the coal pile concern.
A request for engineering assistance (REI-79-9-7) has been initiated c.
to resolve the diesel and ventilation air intake concerns.
Since engineering disposition of these items is not complete at this time, this item will remain open.
I
.
- - - -
. - -.. -
...
.
-
- --
-
..
(
-2-4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Operations Plant Operations were reviewed by the inspector to ascertain conformance with regulatory requirements and technincal specifications.
a.
Daily Activities The inspector maintained daily awareness of plant status and significant activities through discussions with members of the plant staff and operating personnel. Selected portions of the various daily log books and control room data sheets were examined on a daily basis during the report period. The inspector made several plant tours in selected areeas of the turbine and auxiliary buildings. The control room was visited on a more frequent basis than other portions of the plant.
Observations included instrument readings and recordings, housekeeping and status of operating systems and components.
Informal discussions were held with operators and other personnel on work activities and status of equipment. Questions developed by the inspector were satis-factorily answered.
Interviews with a number of plant operations personnel were held on the day and night shifts. Supervisors and control operators actions were observed. Their actions and activities were responsive to an-nunciateor alarms and appeared to be cognizant of plant status.
b.
Plant Jumper Log The inspector reviewed the Plant Jumper Log Book to verify that jumpers placed on equipment were controlled and that a safety evaluation had been performed on each jumper. There is still a relatively large number of active jumpers being maintained in the log, and the licensee is continuing to purge this log of unnecessary jumpers. No discrepan-cies were noted at this time.
Plant Equipment Clearance and Switching Orders c.
The inspector reviewed the Plant Equipment Clearance and Switching Order logs to verify that equipment or components, required for the plant mode of operation at the present time (Mode 1), were available for operation as required by Technical Specifications and that the clearance logs were properly filled out and completed as per CP-ll5,
"In-Plant Equipment Clearance and Switchning Orders." No discrepancies were noted at this tim ~
. _ _ _ _.
_ _ _ _... _ _ _ _. -
..
..
.
Y-3-d.
Short Term Instructions The inspector reviewed the Short Term Instruction book to assure that all operations personnel had read all current instructions. No dis-crepancies were noted.
,
e.
Shift Turnover Checklist
.
The inspector observed execution of this checklist by operations
!
personnel during several shift turnovers and discussed plant status
following turnover. All personnel were well aware of plant status, j
No discrepancies were noted.
f.
Plant Tours
As part of the plant operations review, the inspector toured accessible
-
portions of the plant. During the tour, observations were made regarding the general plant housekeeping and cleanliness and radiation control
practices.
Housekeeping was found to be generally poor in several areas of the auxiliary building. There were pieces of piping, pipe fittings, and general debris in the walkway near the entrance to the seawater pump room. There was a large collection of cardboard on the
119 foot elevation.
Several pieces of wood were lying about in walkways in several different areas. Plastic sheeting and anti-C clothing were found on floors rather than in the contauinated barrels provided.
Spread of marked contaminated areas was considered to be excessive, especially on the 95 foot elevation. The inspector noted that as a result of personnel apparently not following good housekeeping proce-dures as specified in Administrative Instruction AI-1000, a pctential fire and industrial safety hazard existed. The licensee took prompt action to correct this situation when notified by the inspector.
This is an infraction (79-55-01),
i 6.
Review of IE Bulletins The inspector performed a second review of IEB-79-15 and the Unresolved
,
Item (79-46-03) that was generated as a result of the initial review of this Bulletin. The inspector noted that-since cleaning of the intake
,
housing for seawater pungs RWP-2B, further testing indicates acceptable vibration levels.
However, since corrective action has not been completed in connection with the traveling screen problem, this Unresolved Item (79-46-03) will remain open. The Region Il Construction Branch will be
,
responsible for final review of IEB 79-15 dealing with the deep draft pumps.
!
'
i
-
-
... -
. -,
-, -, -
,..,