IR 05000344/1981028
| ML20038B842 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/13/1981 |
| From: | Johnston G, Malmros M, Stewart J, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20038B837 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-81-28, IEB-81-01, IEB-81-03, IEB-81-1, IEB-81-3, IEC-81-01, IEC-81-04, IEC-81-05, IEC-81-06, IEC-81-1, IEC-81-12, IEC-81-4, IEC-81-5, IEC-81-6, NUDOCS 8112090149 | |
| Download: ML20038B842 (6) | |
Text
l
.
.
'
i
'
-U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No.
so-,4afgi-7a Docket No.
so-144 License No.
NpF-1 Safeguards Group-
.
Licensee:
pnvrinnd Genern1 Flectric Comoany 171 S.
U.
Salmon Street pnvrinnd. Orecon 97204 Facility Name:
Trnjnn Inspection'at:
nninier. orecon Inspection conducted:
nerober 1-30.
1981 Inspectors:
h vwk-vs l/[/3[,y)
[N~M.
H.
1 ros, Senior Resident Inspector Date Signed 0'.~
afu/n G.
W ohnston, Resident Inspector Date Signed-
~
. &
llfl3fdf d<" J.
P. hIewart, Reactor Inspector (October 5-9)
Date Signed Approved By:
@ kbh 4[/2[J/
h G.
B.
wetzig, Chief, Reactor Operations Date Signed Pro, cts Section 1,
Reactor Operations Projects Branch
Inspection on October 1-30, 1981 (Report No. 50-344/81-28)
Areas Inspected:
Routine inspections of plant operations,
,
surveillance, security activities, maintenance, and follow-up on IE Bulletins, Circulars, and Licensee Event Reports.
The inspection involved 147 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspectors.
,
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
i e
i
,
s'
8112090149 811113 PDR ADOCK 05000344 G
PDR RV Fonn 219 (2)
.
-
-
- -
- - -
. >
-
'
.c J
DETAILS f
- 1.
Persons Contacted'
^
- C.
P.
Yundt, General Manager
,
- R.
P.
Barkhurst, Manager, Operation & Maintenance C. A.
Olmstead, Manager, Technical. Services J.
D.
Reid, Manager,' Plant Services D.
R.
Keuter, Operations Supervisor D.
W.
Swan, Maintenance Supervisor R.
P.
Schmitt, Engineering Supervisor G.
L.
Rich, Chemistry Supervisor s
T.
O.
Meek, Radiation Protection-Supervisor R.
E.
Susee, Training Supervisor D.-L.
Bennett, Controlc& Electrical Supervisor P.
A.
Morton, _ Quality > Assurance Supervisor'
T.
F.
Bracy, Security Supervisor H.
E.
Rosenbach, Material 1 Control, Supervisor J.
K.
Aldersebaes,' Manager, Nuclear Main'tenance & Construction The inspector falso_ 'intie'rviewed and J. talkedwith other licensee employees during,the course'ofithe inspection.
These included
~
shiftisupervisors,; reactor,and,lauxiliaryfoperators, maintenance personnel, plant' technicians _and 'ngineers, and quality assurance e
personnel.
- Denotes those' attending
~
~ he' exit interviews.
t 2.
Operational Safety Verification During the month, the inspectors observed and examined activities to verify the operationaissafety of the licensee's facility.
The observations and examinations of those activities were con-
' ducted on a daily, weekly, or biweekly basis.
On'a daily basis, the inspectors observed control room activities
'
to verify the licensee's ~ adherence to limiting conditions for operations as prescribed in the facility technical specificctions.
Logs, instrumentation, recorder traces, and other' operation records were examined to obta.n information on plant conditions, trends, and compliance with regulations.
On the occasions when a shift turnover was in progress, the ~ turnover of'information on' plant status was observed to determine that all pertinent information was relayed to the oncoming shift.
During1cach week, the inspectors toured the accessible areas of the facility to observe the following items:
L
. -, -, -... - -
.
-.
.
., - - - - _ -. - - _,. -,,,
,
.,, -.
-,,
.
.. - - - _, -,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
,
k
.~
-2-a.
General plant and" equipment condition, b.
Maintenance requests and repairs.
c.
Fire-hazards and firi fighting equipment.
d.
Ignition. sources and flammable material control.
e.
Conduct of~ activities in accordance with 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 complied with technical specification limiting conditions for operation, with respect to removal of equipment from service.
Verification was achieved by selecting one safety-related system or component weekly and verifying proper breaker, switch, and valve positions, both for removing the systen or components from service and returning it to service.
During each week, the inspectors conversed with control room operators and other plant personnel.
The discussions centered on pertinent topics relating to general plant conditions, pro-cedures, security, training, and other topics aligned with the work activities involved.
Two groups were the subject of obser-vation during shift turnover - the-control room operators and security personnel at the main gate.
The inspectors examined the licensee's nonconformance reports to confirm the deficiencies were identified and tracked by the system.
Identified nonconformances were being tracked and followed to the completion of corrective action.
Logs of jumpers, bypasses, caution, and test tags were examined by the inspectors.
No jumpers or bypasses appeared to have been improperly installed or removed or to have conflicted with the technical specifications.
Implementativa of radiation protec-tion controls was verified by observing portions of area surveys being performed, and by examining radiation work permits currently in effect to see that prescribed clothing and instrumentation were available and used.
Radiation protection instruments were also examined to verify operability and calibration status.
Each week the inspectors verified the operability of a selected emergency safety features (ESF) train.
This was done by direct visual verification of the correct position of valves, avail, ability of power, cooling water supply, system integrity, and general condition of the equipment.
ESF trains verified to be
.
...
..
..
....
.
..
_.
.
_ _ _
,
.
.
,.
-3-operable during the month included containment spray system and the AC electrical distribution system.
During the month of October, the facility experienced five reactor trips.
The inspectors verified by examining logs and reactor trip reports, and by discussions with licensee personnel, that notification via the ENS was done, the root causal factors were evaluated, and that reportability was taken into account..The corrective action, as appropriate in each case, was done prior to the resumption of power operation or mode change where required.
The facility in each case operated normally throughout each trip, and actions taken by plant personnel were appropriate to the conditions of the plant.
The trips occurred on October 4, 12, 22, 23, and 30, 1981.
No items of noncompliance,or deviations were identified.
3.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Followup The circumstances and corrective actions described'in LER Nos.
81-18, 81-19, and 81-20 were examined by the inspectors.
The inspectors found that each LER had b~een reviewed by the licensee and reported to the NRC within the proper reporting interval.
The corrective actions /for each event reported were as follows:
LER 81-18 (Closeb): During routine surveillance testing, turbine first stage pressure channel PT506 was found to be exceeding theilimi, ting setting ~fo'r the 40 percent steam flow
' odd ~as per the corresponding calibration at 20 percent l
curve.
The; channel was recalib' rated and the surveillance test was' conducted to verify ope'rability.
The drift of the instrument was determined to~ be~ normal and not indicative
,
l of any disfunctional natur'e.
!
p:R 81-19'(Closad):
During the' performance of routine periodic i
surveillance.of the
"B" train _ control room emergency ven-tilation sys' tem, the preheat coil did not energize.
The failure was attributed to the diaphragm in the humidistat pneumatic drive mechanism having failed.
The diaphragm was replaced and an operability test uns conducted to verify l
the operability of the train.
LER 81-20 (Closed): During a routine plant tour an Auxiliary Operator observed that the reagent metering pump on the
"B" control room chlorine detector was not working properly.
The bearing on the motor to the pump was found to be dirty and binding the motor.
The bearing was cleaned and lubricated r
!
l l
l
._
__
_ '
j
'
s-4-and the detector was returned to service after' calibration.
The licensee has included inspection and cleaning of the bearing in the preventative maintenance program.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
1E Bulletin / Circular Followup The inspectors examined the licensee's response to the concerns expressed in the following IE Bulletins and Circulars:
Bulletin 81-01 (0 pen):
During the 1981 refueling outage, the licensee completed the tests and inspections on Safety-related mechanical snubbers as defined in PGE's responses dated April 23 and July 20, 1981.
During the testing of the mechanical snubbers, it was determined that three snubbers failed due to an apparent overloading condition.
The cause of the overloading is unknown at this time and is under investigation.
Bulletin 81-03 (Closed): The licensee completed the inspec-tions outlined'in PGE's response dated July 20, 1981, and has scheduled preventive methods for effectively controlling clam infestations in the cooling water systems.
Circular 81-01 (Closed):'The licensee determined that the involved type of push button switches are not installed at this f ac.ili ty.
-
Circular'81-04 (Closed): _The licensee implmented a Shift Technical Advisor (STA) Program in which the STA reviews j
and evaluates. operating ' events, circulars and bulletins.
The STA is kept informed by the. shift supervisor of changes
,
l in plant' operations.
The inspectors reviewed plant engineering i
and administrative' procedures, and interviewed an STA on duty.
l (
Circular 81-05 (Closed):,
inspected all mechan-The licensee i
ical snubbers on safety-related systems at the facility to determine ~ if any bushings were loose or disengaged.
The licensee fou'nd no disengaged bushings and took corrective actions on mechanical snubbers, which had minor problems, which had no effect on operability.
l l
Circular 81-06 (Closed): The licensee determined that the l
involved type of Foxboro 10 to 50 Mil 11 ampere Transmitters
are not installed at this facility.
. _..
,
-, _.
.
.
f
\\
.
-
.
-5-Circular 81-12 (Closed): The licensee reviewed the.proce-dures for surveillance testing of trip circuit breakers.
The licensee's procedures independently verify both the shunt trip and undervoltage trip functions, and verify actual breaker" position.
No items of' noncompliance or deviations'were identified.
5.
Exit Interview
'
The inspectors met.with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on October 19 and November 2, 1981.
During these meetings, the. Senior' Resident Inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
-
!
,
I l
!
{
!
'
,
!
l l
l l
l
!
'
l
'
.