IR 05000344/1980001
| ML19309E195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/20/1980 |
| From: | Malmros M, Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309E189 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-80-01, 50-344-80-1, NUDOCS 8004180527 | |
| Download: ML19309E195 (5) | |
Text
^ftu 1 * i5,0
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0!OiISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCE.".:.NT
,
REGION V
Report No.
50-344/80-01 50-344 NPF-1 License No.
Safeguards Group Docket No.
Licensee:
Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street Portland, Oregon 97204 racility Name: Trojan Inspection at:
Rainier, Oregon Inspection conducted: January 2-31, 1980
- nspectors: df f. '.
4,96
~ n~
Ely m M Ato
~,
.
M. fr. Malm~ os, #phtordispector Dafe Signed r
Date Signed
.
!
's Date Signed Approved By: L
%
L 2O I 9 90
'
D. M. Sternberg, Chief,. Reactor Project Section 1, Date Signed Reactor Operations,,and Nuclear Support Branch i
S u=a ry :
Inspection on January 2-31,1980 (Report No. 50-344/80-01)
Areas Inspected:
Routine inspections of plant operations, maintenance, physical security, calibration, requalification training, surveillance, and follow-up on a licensee event report. The inspection involved 84 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspector.
Results:
One apparent item of noncompliance was identified (Infraction - failure
.
to comply with a physical security procedure for securing of onsite vehicles -
Paragraph 3).
No deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)-
8004180527
. -
,
.
. _ _.
_
_
_
__
i
~'J f.
J
,
.
,
-
,
j
.
DETAILS
,
l 1.
Persons Contacted
\\
\\
- C. P. Yundt, General Manager
'
'
- W. S. Orser, Manager, Operations & Maintenance
'
'
C. A. Olmstead, Manager, Technical Services
,
D. F. Kielblock, Manager, Plant Services
!
R. P. Barkhurst, Operations Supervisor j
D. W. Swan, Maintenance Supervisor
,
,
R. P. Schmitt, Engineering. Supervisor
{
M. A. Bell, Chemistry Supervisor R. L. Russell, Radiation Protection Supervisor (Acting)
R. E. Susee, Training Supervisor
!
i D. L. Bennett, Instrument & Control Supervisor i
J. D. Reid, Quality Assurance Supervisor (Acting)
i T. F. Bracy, Security Supervisor
,
H. E. Rosenbach, Material Control Supervisor i
The inspector also interviewed and talked with other licensee-employees
'
during the course of the inspection. These included shift supervisors,
,
'
reactor and auxiliary operators, maintenance personnel, plant technicians
'
and engineers, and quality assurance personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interviews.
.
2.
Plant Operations
a.
Facility Logs and 06erating Records
!
,
The inspector examined the log entries contained in the control room-log and the shift supervisor's log for facility operations performed L
during January 1980. The log entries were found to have been made
,
consistent with the requirements of the facility administrative orders
!
and to accurately reflect the operational status of the facility.
.
'
Facility logs were reviewed by applicable staff members and operating orders issued by the operations supervisor did not conflict with the
,
intent of the technical specification requirements. Sufficient infor-mation was contained in the control room log and the shift supervisor's log to identify potential problems and to verify compliance with techni-cal specification reporting requirements and limiting conditions for operation.
b.
Facility Tour and Observation of Operations
Tours of the facility were made by the inspector in the control building, reactor auxiliary building, fuel building, intake structure, and the -
'
,
1 i
., =
-.
..
..
,
,
- - -.,, -.
..a
,
-2-
-
turbine building.
During the tours, assessments of equipment and plant conditions were made with the following observations:
(1)
Instrumentation for monitoring the status of the plant was operating.
(2) Radiation controls were properly established.
(3) Piping systems did not show any signs of excessive vibration or leakage.
(4) Detailed system alignment and operability of the safety injection system, waste gas system and the auxiliary feedwater system were verified by the inspector.
(5) Control room observations verified that the facility manning was proper and discussions with shift supervisors and control operators revealed that they were cognizant of the effect of annuciated alarms on plant operations.
Shift turnovers were found to be performed in accordance with the administrative orders and good watchstanding practices.
(6) Chemical analyses for the determination of adequate corrosion inhibitors in the emergency diesel cooling water system were examined.
Sampling of the reactor coolant system and air ejec-tor discharge for radioactivity was observed by the inspector.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
The inspector examined the implementation of the physical security plan to verify that the measures employed by the licensee were consistent with the requirements prescribed in the physical security plan, administrative orders, and federal regulations.
During a tour of the facility on January 21, 1980, the inspector observed a designated vehicle onsite which was unattended with the keys left in the ignition.
This was reported to the security suprevisor and the vehicle was properly secured by security personnel.
The licensee identified the individual responsible for the vehicle and has reinstructed the individual in the proper method for securing a designated vehicle onsite.
The initial training of the individual cid include instructions regarding use of vehicles onsite. This item of noncompliance is attributed to per-sonnel errorand no further corrective action by the licensee is warranted at the present time.
('his is an infraction.)
No deviations were identified.
l
- - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
,
.
.
'
-3-4.
Requalification Training The inspector attended several lectures given by the licensee as part of the operator requalification lecture program. The lectures attended covered the following topics; plant chemistry, heat transfer, fluid flow,
,
thermodynamics, core hot channel factors and steam generator water level control. The lectures were well presented and contained the appropriate technical information necessary for understanding plant operation.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Follow-up The circumstances and corrective action described in LER No. 79-16 were examined by the inspector. The leaking section of pipe was replaced, tested and returned to service. The incident was reviewed by the licensee and reported to the NRC within the proper reporting interval.
Ho items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Calibration The inspector observed the calibration of plant instrumentation. The calibrations were found to have been performed in accordance with approved procedures by appropriately qualified members of the instrument and control organization. Test instruments used during the calibration were verified be in a current stateof calibration traceable to the National Bureau of to Standards. The plant instruments were calibrated or functionally tested within the specified calibration interval required by the technical specifications.
- No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
>
7.
Surveillance Based on observations of surveillance tests and an examination of surveillance test data, the inspector verified that the surveillance activities were per-formed in accordance with approved procedures by properly qualified personnel.
The surveillance test results were verified to be within the acceptance cri-l teria limits of the technical specifications, as applicable. Tests involving reactivity control, power distribution, emergency core cooling systems and electrical power systems were observed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Maintenance Maintenance operations on the emergency power system, plant instrumentation system, and the spent fuel pool cooling system were observed by the inspector l
l
..
.-
.-
-4-and verified to have been performed in accordance with established procedures
'
and technical specification requirements.
During the examination of main-tenance activities related to the above systems, the inspector made the following observations:
'
a.
Maintenance requests had been properly prepared to provide the required administrative approval prior to initiating the work.
b.
The maintenance was performed by qualified members of the maintenance organization.
c.
Safety-related equipment outage worksheets were prepared prior to the removal of safety system components from service.
d.
System tagging operations and plant status controls properly indicated
!
the performance of the maintenance activities.
e.
Applicable operability tests were required prior to the return of the safety-related component to an operable condition.
f.
Applica'.;1e limiting conditions for operation as specified in the technical specifications were met during the above maintenance activities.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
on January 11, 18, 23, 25 and 31, 1980. During these meetings, the inspector summarized the scope and' findings of the inspection. The prompt completion of corrective action to the item of noncompliance discussed in Paragraph 3
'
was acknowledged by the inspector.
,