IR 05000344/1980014
| ML19331D376 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1980 |
| From: | Johnston G, Malmros M, Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19331D373 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-80-14, NUDOCS 8009020251 | |
| Download: ML19331D376 (5) | |
Text
C1
-
V.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUL\\ TORY c0MMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No.
50-344/80-14 Docket No.
50-344 License No.
NPF-1 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street
__ Portland, Oregon 97204 Facility Name:
Trojan Inspection at:
Rainier, Oregon Inspection conducted:
June 2-30, 1980
/ Vb.u
/T[fo Inspectors:
f f f M. H. Malmro deplor Hesiaent inspector Date Signed
' 4 J5" 7[/9[f a g G. W. Johnston, Resicent inspector Date Signed V,.
s
/
Date Signed Approved By:
-
OAd h 82 Ad D. M. %terntierg, Chief,/ Reactor Project Section 1, Ddte Sfgned Reactof Operations and Nbclear Support Branch
/
Su=: nary :
Inspection on June 2-30, 1980 (Report No. 50-344/80-14)
Areas Inspected:
Routine inspections of plant operations, maintenance, curveillance testing, physical security, procurement, emergency preparedness, and followup on a Licensee Event Report. The inspection involved 193 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
8000020$$l
--_
-
..
.
.
.
.
DETAILS
.
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 Super,isor D. W. Swan, Maintenance Supervisor R. P. Schmitt, Engineering Supervisor M. A. Bell, Chemistry Supervisor T. O. Meek, Radiation Protection Supervisor R. E. Susee, Training Supervisor D. L. Bennett, Instrument & Control Supervisor J. D. Reid, Quality Assurance Supervisor T. F. Bracy, Security Supervisor H. E. Rosenbach, Material Control Supervisor The inspector also interviewed and talked with other licensee Aoyees during the course of the inspection. These included s
shift supervisors, reactor.and auxiliary operators, maintenance personnel, plant technicians and engineers, and quality assurance personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interviews.
2.
Operational Safety Verification During the month, the inspectors observed and examined activities to verify ths operational safety of the licensee's facility.' The observations and examinations of those activities were conducted on a daily, weekly or monthly basis, i
On a daily basis, the inspectors observe' control room activities to l
verify the licensee's adherence to limiting conditions for operations as prescribed in the facility technical specifications.
Logs, I
instrumentation, recorder traces, and other operating records were i
examined to obtain information on plaat conditions, trands, and l
compliance with regulations. On the occasions when a shift turnover l
was in progress, the turnover of information on plant status was observed to determine that all pertinent information was relayed to the oncoming shift.
During each week, the inspectors toured the accessible areas of the
'
facility to assess the following areas:
a.
General plant and equipment conditions.
l b.
Maintenance requests and repairs.
c.
Fire hazards and fire fighting equipment.
l
!
l I
.-
-
.
. -
.
-.
- - -.
-
.
-2-
.
.
d.
Ignition sources and flammable material control.
e.
Conduct of activities as per the licensee's administrative controls and approved procedures.
f.
Interiors of electrical and control panels.
g.
Implementation of the licensee's physical security plan.
h.
Radiation protection controls.
i.
Plant housekeeping and cleanliness.
j.
Radioactive waste systems.
The licensee's equipment clearance control was examined weekly by the inspectors to determine that the licensee compliad with technical specification limiting conditions for operation, w.c';
-espect to removal of equipment from service. Verification was.;hieved by selecting one safety related system or component weec y and verifying proper breaker, switch, and salve positions; both fo-emovirg the system or component from service and returning it to service.
During each week, the inspectors conversed with operators in the control room, and other plant personnel. The discussions centered on pertinent topics relating to general plant conditions, procedures..
security, training, and other topics aligned with the work activities involved. Two groups were the subject of observation during shift turnover - the control room and security perscnnel at the main gate.
Loss of jumpers, bypasses, caution, and test tags were examined by the inspectors.
fio jumpers or bypasses appeared to have been imprope ly installed or removed, or to have conflicted with the technical specifications.
To verify that the licensee's radioactive waste systems controls w tre being implemented, the inspectors witnessed selected portions of releases frcm a treated waste monitor tank and a steam generator.
The releases were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, proper approvals were obtained, sampling was conducted, and instrumentation was operable and calibrated.
Radiation protection controls were verified by the inspector to be implemented by observing portions of area surveys being performed and examining radiation work permits currently in effect to see that irescribed clothing and instrumentation were used and were available.
Radiation protection instruments were also examined to verify operability ind calibration status.
t o items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
-
- -
- -
.
.
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-3-
.
.
3.
ttintenance
'
Maintenance activities including both preventive and corrective maintenance were observed by the inspectors during the month.
Observations by the inspectors verified that proper approvals, system clearances and tests of redundant equipment were performed, as appropriate, prior to maintenance of safety related systems or com-ponents.
The inspectors verified that qualified personnel performed the maintenance using appropriate maintenance procedures.
Replacement parts were examined to determine the proper certification of materials, workmanship and tests. During the actual performance of the maintenance activity, the inspectors checked for proper radiological controls and housekeeping, as appropriate. Upon completion of the maintenance activity, the inspectors verified that the component or system was properly tested prior to returning the system or component to service.
During the month maintenance activities associated with the emergency diesel generator, turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump, and the residual heat removal pump were examined.
tio items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Surveillance The surveillance testing of safety-related systems was witnessed by the inspectors. Observations by the inspectors included verification that proper procedures were used, test instrumentation was calibrated and that the system or component being tested was properly removed from service if required by the test procedure.
Following completion of the surveillance tests, the inspectors verified that the test results met the acceptance criteria of the technical specifications and were reviewed by cognizant licensee personnel. The inspectors also verified that corrective action wa.s initiated, if required, to determine the cause for any unacceptable test results and to restore the system or component to an operable status consistent with the technical specifi-cation requirements. Surveillance tests witnessed during the month were associated with the following systems: source range calibration, cold rod drop time tests, power range trip setpoints, endurance runs of the auxiliary feedwater pumps and emergency diesel generators, tio items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Emergency Preparedness On June 25, 1980, the inspectors visited the Cowlitz County Communications
'
Center which is respot sible for the notification of local and state officials in the State of Washu.gton during a Trojan emergency. The inspectors toured the facility and based on discussions with facility representatives found that facility personnel were knowledgeable of the requirements of Trojan's Radiological Emergency Response Plan and were capable of responding to a radiological '..icident at Trojan.
tio items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
.
- - -
.
-.
--
_
-4-
,
.
6.
Procurement The inspectors toured the licensee's warehous'e'fhcility to verify that safety related material and spare parts were being handled, stored, and identified in accordance with the requirements of the licensee's quality assurance procedures. The inspectors verified the following:
a.
Safety related material and spare parts received on site had been inspected by qualified personnel.
b.
Records of receipt inspections were examined and found to be complete.
c.
Storage and packaging requirements were defined in the purchase requisition and were being met during the storage of the applicable items.
d.
Preventive maintenance of stored items as applicable, was being performed by warehouse personnel.
e.
Material was identified to permit traceability to on-file quality certification documents.
f.
Limited shelf life items were identified and controlled.
g.
Records of periodic warehouse inspections and surveillance were being maintained.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Followup The circumstances and corrective action described in LER No. 80-08 were examined by the inspectors. The inspectors verified that discussions were held with appropriate supervisors and the plant Planner / Scheduler to emphasize the importance of coordinating maintenance activities ta assure that containment integrity requirements are met under all applicable plant modes. The LER had been properly reviewed by the licensee and reported to the NRC within the proper reporting interval.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
on June 12 and 27,1980. During these meetings the inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.