IR 05000317/1981022
| ML20008F264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1981 |
| From: | Architzel R, Bland J, Callahan C, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20008F253 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-317-81-22, 50-318-80-18, NUDOCS 8103120661 | |
| Download: ML20008F264 (16) | |
Text
(Document id:ntification
-
-
numb:rs on next page)
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION G
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFOPCEMENT Region I 50-317/80-22 Report No. 50-318/80-18 50-317 Docket No.
50-318 DPR-53 C
License No.
OPR-69 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Baltimore Gas and Electric Company P.O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Facility Name:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
Lusby, Maryland Inspection conducted: November 1-30, 1980 Inspectors:
f.0 k N b k
il?/?I R. E. Architzel, Senior Resident Reactor date signed t
Oc-4, %
h I hie l C. J. Callahan, Resident Reactor Inspector date signed t t 0 % %.
k I h Itt
'
,
J. 5. Bland, Radiation 5'pecialist, IE:HQ date signed
- pproved by:
$ E bNh
'i l 7 I rri A
E C. McCabe, Jr., Chief, Reactor Projects date signed Section No. 2, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on November 1-30, 1980 (Combined Report Nos. 50-317/80-22 and 50-318/80-18)
f Areas Inspected: Routine, onsite regular and backshift inspection by the resident inspectors (49 hours5.671296e-4 days <br />0.0136 hours <br />8.101852e-5 weeks <br />1.86445e-5 months <br />, Unit 1; 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br />, Unit 2). Areas inspected included the control room and the accessible portions of the auxiliary, turbine, service Unit 1 Containment, and intake buildings; radiation protection; physical security; fire protection; plant operating records; NRC Bulletins, NRC Circulars, review of plant operations and reporting to the NRC.
Noncompliances:
None.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
8103120 %
-
.
.
,
,
50318-80-10-27 50318-80-10-24 50317-80-10-28 50317-80-10-24 50317-79-06-06
-
"
50318-80-10-19 50317-80-10-17
.
50318-80-11-06 50317-80-10-11 50317-80-10-02 50317-80-10-01 50317-80-09-25 50317-80-09-26 50318-80-10-14 50318-80-09-26 50318-80-09-14 50318-80-09-15 50318-80-10-15 50318-80-09-01 50317-80-10-18 50317-80-11-03 50317-80-11-12 50318-80-11-16 50317-80-11-21 50317-80-11-03
.
e
_.
_
-
.
.
_
-. _.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted The following technical and supervisory level personnel were contacted:
A. A. Barth, Quality Assurance Specialist G. E. Brobst, General Supervisor, Chemistry J. T. Carroll, General Supervisor, Operations J. T. Carlson, Foreman, Radiation Safety C. L. Dunkerly, Shift Supervisor J. E. Gilbert, Shift Supervisor D. E. Huseby, Engineering Technician R. P. Heibel, Senior Engineer C. Key, Engineer, EED J. F. Lohr, Shift Supervisor R. O. Mathews, Assistant General Supervisor, Nuclear Security N. L. Millis, General Supervisor, Radiation Safety J. E. Rivera, Shift Supervisor P. G. Rizzo, Assistant General Foreman, Maintenance L. B. Russell, Plant Superintendent R. P. Sheranko, General Supervisor, Maintenance J. V. Shugart, Supervisor, Nuclear Security K. G. Tietjen, Technical Specialist
-
J. A. Tiernan, Manager, Nuclear Power Department R. L. Wendorlich, Engineer, Operations D. Zyriek, Shift Supervisor
Other licensee employees were also contacted.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Inspector Follow Item (317/80-16-02):
Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP)
stud wastage.
The licensee has replaced 13 studs on RCP No.12A and 14 studs on RCP No.11B in accordance with the comitments made in Baltimore Gas and Electric letter of November 13, 1980 to R. A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 3, Division of Licensing.
Non-destructive testing of the removed i
studs identified no additional structural defects.
Selected studs will be
delivered to Combustion Engineering for destructive testing.
The licensee intends to submit a followup report containing detailed results of stud
'
testing.
The report and additional NRC action will be inspected in accord-ance with the inservice inspection program.
In addition, the IE:HQ Inspec-tion Specialist responsible for the preparation of Information Notice 80-27, Degradation of Reactor Coolant Pump Studs, made a site visit (November 14, 1980) to evaluate generic aspects of the Information Notice.
This item will be held open pending completion of the licensee followup report.
-
I
.
y
_
w
,,
,,
-, - - - -
.
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (317/80-02-08; 318/80-02-14):
Revised Reporting Requirements.
The inspector verified that the reporting requirements delineated in 10 CFR 50.72 have been incorporated into CCI 1180 (Change 2 dated October 31,1980), Reporting Requirements.
In addition the instruc-tion includes guidance for notificatien of the Calvert County control center of all events having potential media interest.
(Closed) Noncompliance (317/80-01-02; 318/80-01-03):
POSRC Failure to Review T.S. violations identified in NRC Inspection Reports.
The inspector verified the licensees corrective action stated in a letter dated August 5, 1980.
Review of POSRC Meeting 80-113 minutes dated August 13, 1980 docu-mented review of those items described in NRC Inspection Retorts 317/79-02, 05, 07, 11, 13, 18 and 318/79-02, 05, 06, 10, and 15.
(Closed) Noncompliance (317/80-01-01; 318/80-01-02):
Diesel Generator Operating Procedure Inadequate.
The inspector reviewed GS-0 Standing Instruction 80-01, issued February 6,1980 requiring a verification that, prior to shutdown of a Diesel, the initiating signal must be locally veri-fled at the ESFAS cabinets as reset.
In addition, a caution statement has been added to 0I-21, Diesel Generators (Revision 12 dated May 14, 1980)
including a similar precaution in the shutdown section.
(Closed) Noncompliance (318/80-01-01):
Failure to report the inoperability of the emergency A.C. Power system for Unit 2 within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The inspec-tor determined, by interviews conducted with individual shift supervisors, that the licensee operating staff has been instructed on Technical Specifi-cation 6.9.1.8.F.
This corrective action is in accordance with that speci-fied in a licensee letter dated August 5,1980.
(Closed) Noncompliances (317/80-06-01); 318/80-06-02 and 317/80-06-10; 318/80-06-05):
Smoking in a No Smoking Area and Improper Storage of an Acetylene Gas Bottle.
The inspector verified the licensees corrective actions for these items as described in a letter dated August 21, 1980.
As noted in the inspection report corrective action for the particular noncompliances had been taken following inspection discussions with the licensee.
The inspector verified that additional postings surrounding the control board frames have been placed.
Routine inspector surveillance of this area has not revealed further evidence of smoking.
The inspector reviewed revised Fire Protection Inspection Report, format attachment 4 to CCI 133 B, change 5 dated May 22, 1980.
The new form requires followup inspection by the Fire Protection Inspector.
In addition, the inspector reviewed a General Supervisor Training and Technical Services Memorandum to file dated August 12, 1980.
This memorandum documented the requirement for the accompaniment of the Fire Protection Inspector by laborers to
,
l ensure timely corrective action of deficient items.
The system for issu-ing gas bottles used for burning and cutting has been modified to require issuance from the tool rooms rather than the storerooms resulting in closer accounting of the bottles via unique serial numbers.
,
,
t
_ _ _ _. _ _.
..__ _ - _ _
-
_._.__
__
-. _ _ _. _ _ - _
.
-_
_
,
l
.
-
!
-
5 I
!
i i
(Closed) Noncompliance (317/80-06-02; 318/80-06-03):
Response to security
,
alarms.
The inspector verified that the corrective action indicated in i
the licensee's letter dated August 21, 1980 has been taken.
Direct
'
observations of alarm response and interviews with selected security person-
'
nel were conducted during this report period.
The licensee has issued a
,
directive to all security officers, dated September 19, 1980, regarding alarm response and personnel accountability.
No repetition or remaining procedural inadequacy has been identified.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (317/80-14-02):
RCS Leakage Detection by Sump Draining Frequency.
The inspector reviewed revised Control Room Log, sheets (new log sheet 11), CCI 114A, Change 1, which contain a conserva-i tive determination of RCS unidentified leakage as determined by the fre-quency of draining the containment sumps (interval to be greater than 44
,
minutes for a 44 gallon sump corresponds to no more than 1 gpm leakage).
'
(Closed) Inspector Follow Item (317/80-15-03):
Failure to install physical interlocks to prevent movement of spent fuel racks over fuel assemblies.
Personnel involved in the spent fuel rack modification have been instructed regarding the requirements for installation and operability of the interlock
'
and the potential consequences of violating the Cask Handling Crane operat-
!
ing procedures. A sign reminding operators of the specific requirements for operation of the crane has been posted ir. the spent fuel area.
POSRC
.
review of this violation was conducted on October 21, 1980 and recorded in
'
POSRC meeting minutes No.80-147.
'
!
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-318/79-16-02):
Cont'ainment Polar Crane
'
Inspection Procedure.
The licensee has revised "HE-5, 180/25, Ton Polar Crane Periodic Checkout Procedure" dated Octcber 17, 1980, to conform to ANSI B30.2.0-1976.-
-
,
(Closed) Unresolved Item (317/80-05-03; 318/80-06-04):
Vital Area Doors.
Continued surveillance of this area has been performed by the resident
.
inspectors, and the situation noted was apparently an isolated case.
This i
area will-be routinely examined during future inspections.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (317/80-14-03; 318/80-13-02):
Current Facility Licenses.
The irm ector verified that current revised copies of facility
,
licenses DPR 53 and 69 were available in the General Office.
Provisions j
for updating the licenses were discussed with the Office Supervisor.
!
(Closed) Unresolved Item (317/80-15-03; 318/80-14-03):
Submit LER on Masonry i
Wall Design. The inspector reviewed LER 80-053/01T, dated October 3, 1980, describing the discovery and replacement of three stacked block shield walls.
In addition, the inspector discussed an NED memorandum dated November 18, 1980 from the Licensing Engineer to the EED Manager
. discussing the scheduling of training (with respect to *1RC Reporting Require-
.
ments) for EED Engineers.
!
'
..
--
-_ _
_
_
_
.
(Closed) Inspector Follow Item (317/80-15-05):
Determination of Substantial Safety Hazard Concerning High Density Fuel Storage Racks.
The inspector reviewed " Evaluation Report for Nonconforming 2 x 2 Storage Cell Mooule for High Density Fuel Storage Racks, NES Document 81A0569, Revision 0, dated
<
October 22, 1980 and associated Test Plan, ?. S Document 80A3652, Revision 0, dated October 14, 1980. These documents were provided to NRC Region I for further review.
Inspection activities in this area are further detailed in NRC Inspection Report 317/80-21.
(Closed) Facility Housekeeping Controls (317/80-02-02; 318/80-02-03):
The inspector verified that CCI 200 D, Maintenance Requests, has been revised to include a requirement for the job lead man to verify that the work area has been cleaned following completion of work.
A sign off is provided on the Maintenance Request Form (Attachment 1 to CCI 2000) to document this activity.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (317/79-23-03):
Review Power Distribution Anomaly Final Report. The inspector reviewed the licensee's report concern-ing the Unit 1 power distribution episode during Cycle 4.
The report was forwarded by a letter dated August 5,1980 to Operating Reactors Branch 3, Division of Licensing, NRR. The inspector had no questions on the report.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item 317/79-22-02 and 318/79-21-02:
The inspector reviewed Procedures RCP-3-506 and RCP-3-502, which address the licensee's solid waste packaging and shipping requirements. All items which had been previous identified as not adequately addressed have been incorporated in procedure revisions and/or procedure changes.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 317/80-02-05 and 318/80-02-10: The inspector reviewed the licensee requirements for releases of radioactive effluents.
A release permit is required for each release from the following sources; the waste gas decay tanks, containment purge, and the liquid waste monitor j
tanks.
For liquid releases, if the projected releases for the remainer of the the calendar quarter exceed 2.5 curies, management approval is required prior to discharge.
This 2.5 Ci projection corresponds to the Technical Specification requirement that the licensee process all liquids through the equipment in tne waste processing system prior to discharge.
For gaseous releases, management approval is required for all releases in
,
excess of the annual design objective release rate.
This annual design objective release rate correponds to a maximum offsite dose of 5 mrem /yr (total body) and 15 mrem /yr (thyroid).
Discussions with the licensee indicated that general basis for evaluation include the plant operating status, total curie gaantity of the release, processing systems available, and any previous processing.
A comment was made that consideration should be given to formalizing these criteria.
The licensee acknowledged the consnent, stating that effort was being expended in this area.
u
.
.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 50-317/79-08-01 and 50-318/79-07-01:
The inspector examined the Controlled Copy of the Radiation / Chemistry Procedures (RCP series) located in the Radiation-Chemistry Supervisor's Office.
The specific procedures examined (RCP-3-306, RCP-3-3-304, and RCP-3-506) included the latest revisions and were up-to-date.
The Procedure Change Log was also examined and the distribution of the latest RCP change was verified.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 50-317/79-18-03 and 50-318/79-15-03:
Review Evaluation of Dosimetry Discrepancies.
The inspector verified that the previously identified dosimetry discrepancies had been evaluated.
An evaluation is required whenever an individual's measured dose, by self-reading dosimeter (SRD) and TLD, differ by more than 25% and the dose is greater than 150 mrem as determined by the TLD.
In general, these evalua-tions consist of a review of the TLD reader calibration, TLD QA audit and SRO leak and calibration checks.
Also, the SRD is drift and source check tested.
If needed, personnel interviews are conducted to better define the descrepancies.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 317/80-03-03 and 318/80-03-03: Examine Gaseous Waste Piping.
The inspector conducted a visual examination of the facility's gaseous waste processing system.
The portions of the system and associated piping examined revealed no additional occurrences of poor maintenance.
The faulty relief valve previously identified for poor maintenance had been properly repaired.
3.
Review of Plant Operations a.
Plant Tour At various times the inspector toured the facility, including the Control Room, Auxiliary Building, Turbine Building, Outside Peripheral Area Security Buildings. Health Physics Control Points, Diesel Genera-tor Rooms, Service Building, Intake Structure, and Unit 1 Containment.
Sampling checks of the following were made.
Radiation controls established by the licensee, including posting
--
of radiation areas, conditions of step-off pads and disposal of protective clothing.
Control Room manning, including observation of shift turnover and
--
panel walkdowns.
Systems and equipment checks for fluid leaks or abnormal piping
--
vibration.
.
.
.
Seismic restraint and hydraulic snubber checks to verify
--
adequate installation and fluid levels.
Plant housekeeping conditions, including general cleanliness
--
and storage to preclude safety or fire hazards.
Control Room and local monitoring instrumentation for various
--
components and parameters were observed, including reactor power level, CEA positions and safety-related valve position indication.
Whether proper access controls were established.
-
--
Fuel assembly placement and core video verifications (Unit 1).
--
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
b.
Review of Operating Logs, Records Logs and records were reviewed to identify significant changes and trends, to assure required entries were being made, to verify Operat-ing Orders conform to the Technical Specifications, to verify proper identification of abnornal conditions, and to verify conformance to reporting requirements and Limiting Conditions for Operation.
The following records were reviewed for the report period:
Shift Supervisor's Log
--
Unit 1 Control Room Operator's Log
--
' Unit 2 Control Room Operator's Log
--
Nuclear Flant Engineer - Operations Notes and Instructions
--
Unit I and 2's Control Room Daily Operating Logs (sampling review)
--
Service Building Operator's Log
--
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
l 4.
Review of Events Requiring One Hour Notification of the NRC The circumstances surroundinc the following events requiring prompt (one
.
hour) notification of the NRC via the dedicated telephone (ENS-line) were reviewed.
Medical Emergency
--
A contract worker, apparently suffering from exhaustion, was taken to Calvert Memorial Hospital by ambulance about 12 p.m. on November 3, 1980.
Radioactivity was not involved.
.
.
.
Loss of Shutdown Cooling
--
About 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 1980, Shutdown Cooling was lost on Unit 1 during a refueling outage.
The Reactor Vessel Head was removed and shutdown cooling was in progress using No. 12 Low Pressure Safety Injection (LPSI) pump.
A Recirculation Actuation Signal (RAS) was generated upon re-energizing an Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) cabinet which was previously de-energized for wiring modifications.
The operator detected the problem and restarted No.12 LPSI pump with only a 2 degree Fahrehneit increase in coolant temperature.
Licensee review attributed the cause to a design feature for the cabinet ener-gizing function.
Tne plant staff has been briefed regarding the nature of this problem.
Loss of Unit 1 Vital Bus
--
About 12 p.m. on November 12, 1980, the 4KV circuit breaker to No. 11 vital bus tripped.
An Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) actuation resulted in Emergency Diesel start and Load Pickup without safety injection.
The plant was in Mode 6 (Refueling).
Normal power was restored from the alternate supply.
ESF was reset and shutdown cooling resumed on No.12 Low Pressure Safety Injection (LPSI) pump.
Subsequent troubleshooting did not identify the cause of the trip.
NRC inspection identified no licensee review inadequacies.
Plant Emergency
--
A plant emergency was declared about 11:30 a.m. on November 16, 1980, when 3 Radiation Alarms were received while spent resin was being trans-ferred from a deborating ion exchanger.
The transfer operation was stopped when the alarms were received.
The problem was a faulty valve operating mechanism on the Unit 2 on-line CVCS purification ion exchanger, which resulted in the valve remaining partially open while indicating
[
and feeling shut.
This condition resulted in an unexpected transfer of higher radioactivity coolant from the on-line ion exchanger as well as from the-deborating ion-exchanger.
The gaseous activity in the trans-ferred coolant was vented through hard piping into the Unit 2 Main Vent.
This is a normally open flow path during resin transfer operations.
Conditions were restored to normal and the plant emergency was declared
,
'
over at 12:30 p.m. the maximum release rate was calculated to be about 9 percent of the instantanews limit.
Medical Emergency
--
About 11 a.m. on November 21, 1980, a contractor employee injured his back while working on a pipe support in the auxiliary building and was takea to Calvert Memorial Hosptial by ambulance.
Radio-activity was not involved.
.
,.-
,
w w
., + -
~-
_
.
.
5.
Radiation protection a.
Radioactive Effluents The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for controlling radio-active effluents.
Radioactive effluent release permits for the current year were selectively examined.
The release permits (gaseous and liquid)
include appropriate checks for assuring proper analysis and control of the releases.
For example, the auxiliary operator is required to record the radiation levels as indicated by the monitor on the liquid discharge line at an established frequency (typically, every 15 minutes).
Any detected levels outside the projected boards as estimated based on the radiological analysis of the tank prior to the release is cause for terminating the release.
Total effluent releases from the facility are determined from the grab samples of the batch releases and from a grab sample taken weekly from the plant main vents (gaseous).
Gaseous radioiodine and particulates are determined from continuously collected samples (charcoal and filter media) from the plant main vents.
Special samples of the ventilation system (plant vent) are collected and analyzed for increased effluents if indications of higher than normal conditions are received (e.g., alarm on the process vent).
Normally, the plant vent weekly grab samples do not indicate any detec-table levels of radioactivity (typically less than 3X 10-7 pCi/cc for Xe-133).
For quantifying the total releases, the licensee assumes Xe-133 presence at this' lower limit of detection.
The plant vent moni-tor readings are recorded periodically on a strip recorder in the Con-trol Room.
Also, the plant computer provides a print-out hourly of the highest reading on the plant vent effluent monitor for the previous hour.
A licensee evaluation of the plant. computer print-out and the weekly and special grab samples provided justification that the current licensee's method for quantifying releases is conservative.
The new computerized system to be installed early next year will provide an automated accountability method of correlating the effluent monitor readings with the effluent releases.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
b.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring The inspector examined the licensee's environmental monitoring station located at Knotty Pine (. sample point #19), Lusby (sample point #20) and Cove Point (sample point #22).
Each of these stations includes a conti-n'uous air sample for airborne particulates and TLD for direct radiation.
,
The inspector found the stations to be operating and to have the instru-
,
m ntation needed to properly collect and evaluate the samples.
'
l
,
.
.
w v
-
-
--
- - -
m
-
.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
6.
IE Bulletin Followup The inspector reviewe d licensee actions on the following IE Bulletins (IEBs)
to determine that the written response was submitted within the required time period, that the response included the information required including adequate corrective action commitments, and that licensee management had forwarded copies of the response to responsible onsite management.
The review included discussions with licensee personnel and observations and review of items discussed below.
Bulletin 80-10, Contamination of Non-radioactive Systems and Resulting
--
Potential for Unmonitored, Unr.ontrolled Release of Radioactivity to Environment.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's evaluation of the plant design and operation for the identification of non-radioactive systems that had a potential to become contaminated. As a result of the licenses evaluation, the frequency of sampling the following systems for radioactivity was increased to once per week:
component cooling water, service water, and auxiliary boiler. Also, the deminer-alized water system was added to the sampling program at a once per week frequency.
In case of contamination problem development, the licensee initiated actions to perform radiological evaluations of the following systems:
auxiliary boiler, component cooling, service water, plant heating water, demineralized water, nitrogen gas system.
If one of these systems did become contaminated, this evaluation would form the basis for the 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation needed to permit continued
-
system operation.
The inspector's review of the plant design indicated an additional system (with a low probability of cross contamination) that had not been included in the routine sampling program.
The plant air system is used for various operational support functions with radioactive sys-tems and is interconnected with the instrument air system.
The inspec-tor stated that, since the plant air l' slso used for breathing air, consideration should be given to a rouane radiological analysis of the breathing air at the time other chemical analysis are performed to determine breathing air quality.
The licensee acknowledged the
)
inspector's comment.
The inspector had no further questions on IEB 80-10.
Bulletin 80-03, Loss of Charcoal from Standard Type II, 2 Inch, Tray
--
Adsorber Cells.
The licensee's response identified the manufacturer
.
and described the cell design.
The response also addressed previous examination and '.esting of the charcoal tray systems.
A review of the procedure addressing the testing indicated the absence of a
,
I e
x
.
.
requirement for visual inspection in accordance with ANSI N510, Section 5 as was required by the bulletin.
Discussions with the licensee indicated that while visual inspections are conducted at each performance of the procedure, a definitive procedural requirement is not included.
The licensee comitted to revise the procedure to include a procedural step for visual inspection.
This bulletin will remain open pending the licensee's revision of the procedure.
7.
IE Circular Review The following IE Circulars were reviewed on site to determine that the cir-cular was received by licensee management, that a review for applicability was performed, and that further action taken or planned was appropriate.
Circular 80-23, Potential Defects in Beloit Power Systems Emergency
--
Generators.
The inspector verified receipt and distribution of the circular.
the inspections recommended had previously been conducted and reviewed by the NRC (Combined Inspection 317/80-15 and 318/80-14).
The inspector had no further questions on IEC 80-23.
Circular 80-18,- 10 CFR 50.59 Safety Evaluation for Changes to Radio-
--
active Waste Treatment Systems.
The circular was discussed with appro-priate licensee management.
The applicability of the circular to the license plans for upgrading the solid waste treatment system was reviewed with the licensee.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
8.
' Survey of Susceptibility of Calvert Cliffs Service Water Flooding Events The inspector checked on the susceptibility of Calvert Cliffs to a service water flooding event similcr in nature to an event which occurred at Indian Point No. 2.
At Calvert Cliffs, the containment se:np is instrumented with l
redundant alarms.
No sump pumps are used in the containments.
Cooling water services in the containments is of a " closed" design.
One item was identified concerning the reactor cavities, which have no level indications and drain through normally open valves to the containment sumps.
Cooling in the cavities is by forced air (versus cooling water).
The licensee sta.ted that procedural requirements would be added to ensure the cavity drain valves are locked open during operation. This item will be followed
,
l (317/80-22-01;318/80-18-01) by the inspector.
j 9._
Observation of Physical Security l
The resident inspector checked, during regular and off-shift hours, on whether selected aspects of security met regulatory requirements, physical security plans and approved procedures.
.
L
.
a.
Physical Protection Security Organization Observations and personnel interviews indicated that a full time
--
member of the security organization with authority to direct physi-cal security actions was present, as required.
Manning of all three shifts on various days was observed to be
--
as required.
b.
Physical Barriers Selected barriers in the protected area (PA) and the vital areas (VA)
were observed and random monitoring of isolation zones was performed.
Observations of truck and car searches were made.
c.
Access Control Observations of the following items were made:
Identification, authorization and badging
--
Access control searches
--
Escorting
--
Communications
--
--
Compensatory measures when required.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
10.
a.
Review of Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
The inspector reviewed LER's submitted to the NRC:RI office to verify that the details of the event were clearly reported, including the accuracy of the description of cause and adequacy of corrective action.
The inspector determined whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were indicated, and whether the event warranted onsite fo11cwup.
The following LER's were reviewed:
LER No. (Unit No. )
LER Date Event Date Subject 80-050/03L (2)
11/26/80 10/27/80 Channel B Wide Range Nuclear Instrument Power Supply Failure 80-046/03L (2)
11/24/80 10/24/80 Containment Pressure Signal Drift (Channel A) Caused By Signal Isolator.
.
l-m
-gy m--i e-
-
i---+-,yrq
.
LER No. (Unit No.)
LER Date Event Date Subject 80-056/03L (1)
11/28/80 10/28/80 Five Inaccessible Snubbers Dis-covered Inoperable During Refuel-ing Surveillance Inspection 80-061/03L (1)
11/24/80 10/24/80 No. 11 EDG Inoperable Caused By Fouled Injector Tips 79-019/03L (1)
11/25/80 06/06/79 Update Report CRAC Inoperable Failure Determined to Be Open Circuit in One or More Parallel Paths in Stator Winding 80-048/03L (2)
11/19/80 10/19/80 During Power Shaping CEAs 55 and 61 dropped into Core at Different Times 80-045/03L (2)
11/17/80 10/17/80 Containment Particulate RMS Inoperable Due to Broken Termi-nation in Connector 80-049/01X (2)
11/20/80 11/06/80 Periodic Verification of Alter-nate Sources Not Perforced When
Both KV Buses Supplied by 500 KV Rad Bus
- 80-059/01L (1)
11/11/80 10/11/80 ERV Bypass Blockup Valve Packing Leak
-
80-057/03L (1)
10/31/80 10/02/80 No. 12 AFW Pump Turbine Tripped By Worker in Vicinity 80-055/03L (1)
10/31/80 10/01/80 Containment Particulate Detec-tor Inoperable Due to Moisture on Detector 80-054/03L(1)
10/25/80 9/25/80 Pressurizer Pressure Channel Drift Caused By Signal Isolator p
- 80-053/01T (1)
10/03/80 9/26/80 Three Stacked Shielding Walls l
Discovered During IEB 80-11 Review
- Selected for onsite followup.
[
-
i
!
l
-
LER No. (Uni t No. )
LER Date Event Date Subject 80-047/03L (2)
11/14/80 10/14/80 Containment Radiation Monitor-ing System Sample Pump Failed due to Graphite on Bearings 80-044/03L (2)
10/24/80 9/26/80 Steam Generator Isolation Sys-tem Sensor Drift Caused By Signal Isolator 80-043/03L (2)
10/14/80 9/14/80 22B SIT Erratic Level Indication 80-042/03L (2)
10/10/90 9/15/80 Two Snubbers Discovered Inoperable During Surveillance (Safety Injection System)
80-041/03L (2)
10/15/80 9/15/80 CEA No. 9 Dropped Into Core 80-040/03L (2)
10/01/80 9/01/80 CEA No. 34 Dropped Into Core
- 80-060/03L (1)
11/17/80 10/18/80 Safety Valves RC-).J0 and RC-201 Lift Pressures Out of Specifica-tions (High)
- Selected for onsite followup.
b.
For the LER's selected for onsite review (denoted by asterisks above),
the inspector verified that appropriate corrective action was taken or responsibility assigned and that continued operation of the facility was conducted in accordance with Technical Specifications and did not
~
constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59.
Report accuracy, compliance with current reporting requirements and applicability to other site systems and components were also reviewed.
No unacceptable conditio".
're identified.
11.
Review of Periodic and Special
Upon receipt, periodic and specia, eports submitted by the licensee pur-suant to Technical Specification 6.9.1 and 6.9.2 were reviewed by the inspector.
This review included the following considerations:
The report includes the information required to be reported by NRC requirements; test results and/or supporting information are consistent with design predications and performance specifications; planned corrective action is adequate for resolution of identified problems; determination whether any information in the report should be classified as an abnonnal occurrence; and the validity of reported information.
Within the scope of the above, the following periodic-reports were revewed by the inspector:
.
_.
.
.
s
!
October,1980 Operations Status Reports for Calvert Cliffs No.1
--
!
Unit and Calvert Cliffs No. 2 Unit, dated November 13, 1980 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Units Nos.1 & 2, Report of
--
Changes, Tests and Experiments, dated November 5,1980 Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 Report of Power Distribution Episode, dated
--
June,1980 (transmittal letter dated August 5,1980, Lundvall to Clark)
12.
Exit Interview
-
Meetings were held with senior facility management periodically during the i
course of this inspection to discuss the inspection scope and findings. A summary of inspection findings was also provided to the licensee at the conclusion of the report period.
{
e
W