IR 05000344/1985040

Insp Rept 50-344/85-40 on 851209-13.No Noncompliance or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Tests & Experiments Program,Onsite Review Committee,Containment Leak Rate Results Evaluation & Followup Closure of Open Items

ML20141K109
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	12/30/1985
From:	Dodds R, Pereira D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141K105	List: IR 05000344/1985040 ML20141K101
References
50-344-85-40, IEIN-85-066, IEIN-85-66, NUDOCS 8601220223
Download: ML20141K109 (5)

Text

-, .. .. + . . . , ' . . . . - - - . - ~ +-

• ' .-. . .

,'y

.

. L *> g ) L'.  ;

._ ef . _ ' r ae . .

f 3_

'

, . f.; j '

' '1

^4.' * i ,

d

'

'q;

-

,

, ,g

,

~

y

.

i ~ -

_ ,. ,

-

-%, , 5, - { {,::ja ~

'

,

-

4 !, ~ "

, ,

t

-

,

'

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

a t  !

• -

' REGION V

,

. :

'

I - , <

.. .

,

~ Report No. 50-344/85-40

'

"

,,

Docket No. 50-344 License No. NPF-1 .]

.l . . 4 g ' Licensee: Portland General: Electric Company,

'

121 S..W.. Salmon. Street

'

! Portland, Oregon 97204

Faciilty Name

Trojan Nuclear Plant .,. *

f Inspection at: Rainier, Oregon

Inspection Conduc ed 9-13, 1985

.

'

l c

.

Inspector: w' dedlNa N j D. B. Pereira, Reactor I.1spector - . Date Signedi Approved By: . /A/fs/f"J ~

. ,

! R.~T. Dodd's, Chief, Reactor Project Section 1 'Dat6 Sfsned ,

<

.

Summary:

'

'

!

{ , -

l' Inspection Durina the Period of December:9-13, 1985-(Report No.:50-344/85-40) , .

j Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the Tests and. Experiments

Program, Onsite Review Committee, Containment Leak Rate Test Results .

Evaluation, and followup closure of open items. The inspection' involved 38

'

j 4,

hours onsite by one NRC inspector. The inspection modules followed were: '

Test and Experiments Program (37703), Onsite Review-Committee (40700), '

• Containment Leak Rate Test Results' Evaluation (70323)land'IE Bulletin /Immediate Action Letter and Generic . Letter Followup (92703). 4 4 .

' *

i Results: No items of. noncompliance or' deviations were identifie ,

' '4- , } e! >W

.

,

$

.

.e .

>

' N'\

q

.

-

,

- , ..y ,

<- .

' ,

4 m .

r . . ,'bl i

'# , 1 i' I ' s' ~'

! , . . ,

"

+

,

g g

...

r e.,- .

,. .) ..

% . ' ', ca' .4' ( , ,

-

I"

{- ". ,

,

, f '., ,

• n ,

. ,

j #  %.

_ I~

, , (* . .

"

(,  : n

"

- ;

g .,i- {f * , f i (k'

[

'

. ['i

-

[ k. $ cock !. -

, j , ,

,

_ __

. .

.

'

'W 5 . "h u, e. , .

$

e 4 t

-

_y

.

j

.

%a

'

.' '

c,.';<.

, , t +

. .

./ e .

-

..y

.

5 ,

.. . .

w

.._._.r_ _ z u J--_- J ' '

L i *1" -- - -'

.

-m DETAILS Persons Contacted R. P. Schmitt, Manager, Operations and Maintenance J. D. Reid, Manager, Plant Service D. L. Bennett, Supervisor, Control'and Electrical-

• D. W. Swan, Supervisor, Maintenance

• A. Cohlmeyer, Supervisor, Engineering ,

• M. Snook, Senior Inspector, Quality Assurance

• S. Bauer, Engineer, Nuclear Safety and Regulation Department

• H. Singh, Planner, Planning and Scheduling .

'

• Denotes attendance at exit-interview conducted'at Trojan Nuclear Plant on December 13, 198 . Tests and Experiments Program ,

The inspector examined the licensee's1 Test and Experiments program for conformance with regulatory requirements, approved guides and standard The inspector examined a portion of the licensee's 1985 performed tests / experiments and verified whether they were in conformance with the controls as established in Administrative Order (AO)-3-16, entitle "Special Plant Tests".

The inspector examined the following Special Plant Tects: Special Plant Test #48 - Test of a Set of .020" Elements in One Service Water Strainer Special Plant Test #49 - Test of " Unbalanced" Seal in Service Water Booster Pump Special Plant Test #65 - Service Water Strainer Size Test The abave special plant tests were performed in accordance with th requirements, and controls of A0-3-1 The inspector examined the following Temporary Plant , Tests (TPT): Temporary Plant Test 7 - Verification of Manual safety injection switches Temporary Plant Test 40 - Verification of installation and operability of Auxiliary Building Exhaust Vent Radioactivity Monitor Temporary Plant Test 65 - Functional test of ammonia / sulfur dioxide detection system , Temporary Plant Test 69 - Functional test of the system for main turbine runback in the event of a main feedwater pump trip c %

' 9. _IN '

,

_ _ _

'

., , ,

.0

.

'

, l w' >

- .+

-y-- <4 j, . m g_

t .

A, ' '

'

x ,

- . g ~ Temporary Plant Test 71 .' Determination of correct orifice fo '

, ,q circulating water pump' lubricating oil system

'

' ' . Temporary Plant-Test 80 - Verification of proper' installation'and operability of new condenser air-ejector off gas radioactivity _ W-

'

'

\ '

monitor

[ ? Temporary Plant Test 107 - Verification of proper operation.of air-ejector off gas moisture separator' 4

' Temporary Plant Test 308 - Verification 'of proper operation of:. cable spreading room' fire detection system- ,

,

- Temporary Plant Test 109 - Determination of normal . liquid: level o'f  ?

,

new fetedwater heaters >

g Temporary Plant' Test 111 - VerificatiorPof flow Rate o'ff service .

s

"

3s water train A -

1, "

,

.

.

"

> Temporary Plant Test 112 - Verification of. flow rate of service water train B

,m

• (-

_

The above temporary. plant' tests were performed..in accordance with the ,

.

requirements and controls.of A0-3-15, temporary procedure .S .

. .

Both the Special-Plant Tests-and^the Temporary Plant-Tests were' performed in accordance with the, Administrative orders A0-3-16, and A0-3-15J- . #

respectivel /3 ,

, . .

,

s s ,

, . Y No violations-ob w d[viations we,r ,etidentified-in this area'of inspectio , -

a, 2: i, P s

.%v ;

t 1 t

,

-

-

.4

-

-

-

- ,. -

,> Containment Leak Rate ,TestoResults Evaluation - . y *

a

'

-: ; 3;lst. .%%.A , ~

~

The inspector examined whetheiSthe licensee :has_ adequately perforne'd, ~

reviewed, and e'v'aluated o'psr'ational Type A containment:testsland. Type B

or C containne.:tntests with respect to regulatory. requirements, approved "

guides and licensee commitment *

.

m ; ..- . .

Theinspectorexaminedth'elicensee'sPeEiodicContainmentIStegelted "

Leakage'RateTest-(TypeA)ashpeiformedperLPeriodic-EngineeringTest -

(PET)f 5-1,, Rev. 5 during'1983M Theitest? results adequately characteriz$d

.

y the acceptability of the-containmedt^ for the Type A test and as- well'.netL

~

L the following criteria: NR W -

,

_

y .-

l 44 . .

' .

4 Verified that,ghe required leakage rate computations were-performed

-

P.roperly. g 3 . . , .

^

,

.N- , w LEnsuredthatthe.totalmeasured.leakagerate.neet's-therequirS_dy

_

,

'y

'

leakage rate acceptance' criteri .

' y' E '

_

_ t Verifiedthatthetotalmeasuredlleakage'ratetwascorrecte'dIor'

~ .

, . randon' instrument error ,

, m

'

.

, ,

g 't .N'

• , '% '

.)

+ .,

,

. , t...- -s . 5 -

.

) ' * '

% N-

- m - - . ' ?1

.,,- .- . . .- . . . _ _ . - - . , - , , . _- .

-

. . +

~

' '

'3

-

-

.

. - . . .

.

$  : OThe inspector examined the licensee'L Periodic Containment Local Lea i '

{ Rate Test.(type _B or_C) as performed per PET 5-2,.Rev. 11 during.198 "The test results were verified to' meet the required acceptance criteria;_

and the licensee has conducted-an adequate sumanary analysis for the-local- ,

< leak-rate-tests performed.. The inspector witnessed a local leak rate

, Jtest performed on December 11, 1985-on one personnel air' lock per PET 5-2

'

in accordance with paragraph S.3. . The.. maintenance personnel performing; the test reviewed the test equipment and set-up and verified that the -

4~

temperature had stabilized prior.to' commencing.the-decay test. The air-j lock met the acceptance-criteria.

] The Containment Leak' Rate Test results evaluation ~ appears to meet

. regulatory requirements, approved, guides and licensee commitment No violations or deviations were identifie'd in'this area of inspectio I

u Onsite Review Committee ,

The' inspector reviewed. sixteen Plant Review' Board (PRB) meeting minutes'

! to ensure that provisions of the Technical Specifications-dealing with

'

membership, review process, frequency, qualifications, and aLuthority were .

, satisfied in accordance with Section 6.5.1.

I The inspector's review indicated that the PRB meetings were conducted with the proper membership, correct frequency,'and proper review process 4 and authority as detailed in'the Technical Specification Section 6.5.1.'

l The inspector confirmed that several decisions / recommendations.that were reflected in the minutes were c'ompleted. The inspector-plans to attend a j PRB meeting during a subsequent inspection to observe a meetin ^ '

-

No violations.or deviations were identifie ;

'

f Follow-up on Previous Inspection Findinas '

i (Follow-up Ites Information Notice IN)'No.'85-66 Closed)

~

! .

{ Discrepancies Between As-Built Construction Drawings and Equipment

Installations, ._ ,

-

[ '

.

. py c

This information' notice deshribes problems that have occurred with as-built, construction' drawings -not correctly 'or completely

.

, reflecting equipment installations at;several- nucleari plants;

{ - Trojan Nuclear Plant;performedyan' Operational Assessment-Review .

'

L  :(OAR) No'. 85-95 whi"ch~describedithefprocess'that'the Nuclear Plant

'

s

Engineering"(NPE)lOnsiteLBranchirev'iews the As'-Built'Paek' age ((ABP).

. * for 'completene,ss. j As .a minimum,( the( ABPf consists - of

.

i

'

G: .. ? : - ,. .? . . -

'= '

1.a ~ A' copy of~ the'DCP drawingsj marked as As-Built, or

annotated:to ;

- reflect" actual { iinstallatiun or, modification.

p . p ', - 4

' ~Additionaljsketchesordrawings'as-necessaryto1 supplement 1the.-

' '

DCP' drawing '

V " " ~ '

l,, x -

-

,

ih . . . F .. * * ^ '

-

'

E

.

_

L' <; Test and/or' inspection lresults'as applicable.' ~

c j '

,.

'

- - ,  ;

^ *-

, .2

_.-

• J-

,

, ,

'3 *

r ~

-

l'

_

. . . ,

, _

s

'

('

'

_ # '

Ss q Q

'

• '

jqf, _' . , . . ,

s .

,

_ -p . ,, ., , , , - ... . - , . .. . .

. . . - - . + _ . . - - - - - . ,.

-

, . . _ _ . -- _ _ --

, ,

"

'

.4 w- .

"% 7 -

-

I 1The NPE Onsite Branch forward the original ABPI to Nuclea : Plant-Engineering!in Portland. . The ABP is: received'from NPE Onsite and forwarded totthe. responsible discipline lead designed and action engineer for review and-identification of documents to be changed,' including.the' ,

,

, . initiation of the affected document: lis The ABP action engineer evaluates whether the modification as described'

in-the ABP meets the general description of the RDC.and.the, specific; requirements of the DCP/PCC/MR/etc. This ' includes a review of any syste test results.- He reviews the Field Change Notices ~or any other' changes

~

for acceptability. If changes for quality-related. designs have been mad that require additional evaluations,.a second engineer evaluates the-changes for acceptability and documents -this review on: a Design Revie .

- Report.-

As summarized by the QAR No. 85-95, the policies and procedures currentl 'in use by the Nuclear Division are being implemented to ensure that '  ; .,

"

errors similar to those described'in IE Information Notice 85-66 do not

- occur at the Trojan Nuclear Plan Based onithe observations of this ' inspector, IE Notice 85-66 is:

~

considered closed; . >

.

' Exit Interview -

The inspector met.with the lic'ensee_ representatives' denoted'in . ^

paragraph'1'on December,13, 1985,fand. summarized the scope,sud findings ~ .

- 4 of the inspection activitie ,

, - < ,

$['

'

3-

- } ; ;-

-

a li-

+ i

• _ .9 , +

'

i'

,

, % L.s [i

.

4 .

'

..

> q

4 g-hi -

-

4.s g,A p - s

'

k ( '

.

, ,

s . ,

.

,

. -

,

'

< , g

.

,

-

k

.

</

"i-

% ("- *A%

. W m

.

> a

- y (,

!

-

a f, - ,djc +

~

,

,

. '

'

,

O'- -

b k

___

.

~

-.V y h _

. . .-

-

- , ~ ~

.

• '

,