IR 05000344/1981035
| ML20041B436 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1982 |
| From: | Johnston G, Malmros M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041B430 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-81-35, NUDOCS 8202230635 | |
| Download: ML20041B436 (6) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT O
REGION V
.
Report No.
s o _ u A / 91 - 3 s Docket No.
30_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:
December 1-31, 1981 Inspectors:
Q q 2( /fM
'
M. t fr. Q-l a
' Al, Senior Resident Inspector U
[Tdte Signed
&
lrv Yn 14 JVL
&
Dace Signed d.U ohnStbn, Resident Inspector G
J Date Signed Approved By:
N 14W 26./9I1 G.(j J. ZQ)tzie, Chief, Reactor l/
Dath Sigrfed Projects Section 1,
Reactor Operations Projects Branch Summary :
Inspection on December 1-31, 1981(Report 50-344/81-35)
Areas Inspected:
Routine inspections of plant operations, surveillance testing, security activities, maintenance, audit program, onsite committee activities, and followup on Licensee Event Reports and previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 173 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
820223063S 820127 PDR ADOCK 05000344 O
PDR RV Form 219 (2)
.
.
.
--
. -,
.. - -
-
.-
.
.
DETAILS.
.
'
1.
-Persons Contacted
- C.
P.
Yundt, General Manager
- R.
P.
Barkhurst, Manager, Operations 6. Maintenance C. A.
Olmstead, Manager, Technical Services J.7D..Reid, Manager,. Plant-Services D.
R.
Keuter, Operations ~ Supervisor D.
W.
Swan,, Maintenance Supervisor
. R. :P. Schmitt, Engineering. Supervisor G.
L.
Rich, Chemistry Supervisor
,
T.
O.
Meek,. Radiation Protection Supervisor
'
R.
E.
Susee,. Training Supervisor D.
L.
Bennett, Control & Electrical Supervisor P.
A. Morton, Quality Assurance Supervisor R.
W.
Ritschard, Security Supervisor
i H.
E.
Rosenbach, Material Control Supervisor J.
K.
Aldersebaes, Manager, Nuclear Maintenance & Construction 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.
t
- Denotes those attending the exit interviews.
2.
Operationsl Safety Verification
During the month, the inspectors observed and examined activities
'
to verify the operational safety of the licensee's facility.
The" observations and1 examinations of-those' activities were con-duc ted -on a daily, weekly, or, biweekly basis.
!
On a daily.'as'is, the
'nspectors ~obse'rved control room activities b
i l
to verify ~the licensee's adherence to" limiting conditions for operations as~ p r e s c r ib'e d. i rt theffacility technical specifica-tions.
Logs, ins trume'n ta t ion, rec' order ' t races, 'and. other ~ opera-
tions recordsrwere' examined to obt'ain information on plant conditions, trends and_compliancerwith 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.
,
'
a
.
- -
,
-,,.. _,.. _ _,,,..
. - _.. _. -. _.... _,, _ _ _, _.,..
,, _
...,..,_.._,-
_
,
.
,,-
. -., ~
...
.
.
-2-During each week, the inspectors toured the accessible areas of the facility to observe the following items:
a.
General plant and equipment conditions.
b.
. Maintenance requests and repairs.
c.
Fire hazards and fire 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.
1.
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 system or component from service and re-turning it to service.
During each week, the inspectors conversed with operators in the control room, and other plant personnel.
The discussions centered on general plant conditions, procedures, security, training, and with the work activities underway.
Two groups were the subject of observation 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, and 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.
Implementation of radiation protection controls was verified by observing portions of area surveys being performed, and by examining radiation work permits currently in effect to see.that pre-scribed clothing and instrumentation were available and used.
Radiation protection instruments were also' examined to verify operability and satisfactory calibration status.
-
_
-
-
-
.. _. -
O-3-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, availability of power, cooling water supply, system integrity, and general condition of the equipment.
ESF trains verified to be operable during the month included the auxiliary feedwater system, the component cooling water system, the service water system and the safety inj ec tion system.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Maintenance Maintenance activities invol'ving preventive and. corrective maintenance were observed by'the inspectors during_the month.
Observations by the inspectors verified t h'a t proper l approvals, system clearances and tests of.radundant equipuent were per-formed, as appropriate, prior,to maintenance of safety-related systems or components.
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 systcm or component to service.
During the month maintenance' activities observed were associated with the react r vessel stud tensioners, boric acid transfer pump, limitorque valve operators and the core sub-cooling monitor.
-
l No 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 instrumenta-tion 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 was 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 technical specification requirement.
-4-Surveillance tests witnessed during the month were associated with the following systems:
reactor protection, engineered safety features, and process radiation monitoring systems.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Followup The circumstances and corrective actions described in LER Nos. 81-26 and 81-27 were examined by the inspectors.
The inspectors found that each LER had been reviewed by the licensee and reported to the NRC within the proper reoorting interval.
The corrective actions for each event reported was as follows:
LER 81-26 (Closed): The licensee has initiated a change to Instruction (01-3-5) to include a precautionary Operating ~
the closing'of a centrifugal charging pump warning rcg'arding (CCP) miniflow valve.
Additionally, the Night Orders have a requirement to station a'special watc7, during any operations requiring the. closure of a CCP miniflow valve.
LER 81-27 (Closed): Tlt e licensee's procedures for the control of maintenance and-for the, verification of proper clearances prior to-the commencement of maintenance have been reviewed with facility work groups.
Specific instructions require that the contractor's work group foreman personally verify a tag-out prior to the commencement of work.
This specific requirement has been documented in a letter from the site contractor to facility management responsible for site con-tractor activities.
One item of noncompliance was id en t ifi ed 'uy the licensee, in that facility procedures were not complied with for the control of maintenance as described in LER 81-27.
No deviations were identified.
6.
Audit Program Implementation The inspectors observed the audit of facility activities by representatives of the Quality Assurance Organization.
The audit, No. T-19, was found to be conducted in accorda: ice with approved procedures using prepared checklists by proptrly qualified personnel.
The inspectors reviewed the records of previous audits and found that audit deficiencies were identi-fied to the management of the audited organization for re-solution.
Resolution of audit findings was in writing and was found to address the significant aspects of the audit findings and recommendations.
- -
-. -
..
.
5-
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Onsite Review Committee The inspector attended a meeting of the Plant Review Board on December 11, 1981.
The meeting was conducted in accordance
,
with Administrative Order A0-21 which incorporates the technical specification requirements applicable to the. Plant Review Board activities.
Subsequent to the meeting, the minutes were reviewed by the inspector and were found to accurately document the items discussed during the Plant Review Board meeting.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Followup on Previous Inspection Findings
~
^
PA-81-02 (Closed):
The information in the licensee's response dated December 3, 1981, to the enforcement finding related to the.use of sub-tisr procedures, as described in IE Inspec-tion Report No. 50-344/81-26, has been examined by the in-spectors and found to adequately' require Plant Review Board review of safety related procedures required by Technical Specification'6.8.
.The-licensee's corrective action resulted in fifty three sub-tier procedures being added to the Plant Operating _ Manual.
The organizations primarily affected by the procedure. changes were the Instrument & Control Group with twelve procedures and the Chemistry Group with thirty seven procedures.
81-18-01 & 02 (Closed): The information in the licensee's response dated August'18, 1981, to the enforcement findings described in IE Inspection Report No. 50-344/81-18, was ex-amined by the inspectors.
Maintenance Organization Procedure
No. LPT-20, Liquid Nitrogen Freeze Seals, has been issued by the Maintenance Supervisor and provides sufficient guidance to provide for the application of freeze seals to facility piping.
This procedure in combination with appropriate train-ing and the maintenance controls prescribed in Administrative Orders should preclude recurrence of the conditions which led to the noncompliance conditions during previous freeze seal activities.
9.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on December 18, 1981 and January 8, 1082.
During these meetings, the Senior Resident Inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.