IR 05000344/1988015
| ML20155A643 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1988 |
| From: | Mendoca M, Pereira D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155A637 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-88-15, NUDOCS 8806100163 | |
| Download: ML20155A643 (6) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ -
i
.
'.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No:
50-344/88-15 Docket No.
50-344
,
l License No. NPF-1 l-i Licensee:
Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street Portland, Oregon 97204 t
Facility Name:
Trojan Nuclear Plant Inspection at:
Rainier, Oregon Inspection con ucte : Ap il 2 9, 1988 Inspector:
_ ann M/Act YW5 D. B. Pereira, Reactor Inspector Date Signed
- N
Approved by:
M. M. Mendonca, Chief, Date Signed Reactor Project Section 1 Summary:
Inspection During the Period of April 25-29, 1988 (Report 50-344/88-15)
Areas Inspected:
This routine, unannounced inspection by the Project Inspector involved the evaluation of the Design Bases of the Diesel Generators, review of the Tests and Experiments Program, review of the Quality Assurance's Program of Measuring and Test Equipment, and onsite Followup on Previous Inspection Findings.
During this inspection, inspection modules 30703, 92720, 37703, 35750, and 92701 were used.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
The design bases document of the diesel generators was extensive and thorough.
References were complete and in order.
The tests and experiment program was adequate, however the Administrative Order procedure controlling it needed to be revised to become current with the intended references.
The Measuring and Test Equipment Program was extensive and indicated a thorough and knowledgeable staff for performing the calibrations.
8806100163 880525 PDF4 ADOCK 05000344 Q
_ _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-_ _____-______ __.
.
...
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
.a.
Licensee Personnel
- C. A. Olmstead, Plant Manager
- D. W. Swan, Manager, Technical Services
- R. P. Schmitt, Manager, Operations and Maintenance
- M. Schwartz, Manager, Surveillance and Test
- C. Brown, Manager, Quality Assurance Branch Manager
- A. Ankrum, Compliance Engineer
- J. Duke, Performance Monitoring and Event Analysis evaluator
- G. Kent, Supervising Engineer
- R. Rowley, Inservice Inspection Engineer R. A. Reinart, Suparvisor, Instrument and Control A. M. Puzey, Office Supervisor b.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission R. Barr
- C. Clark c.
Oregon Department of Energy.
- H. Moomey, Oregon Resident Inspector
Attended the Exit Meeting on April 29, 1988.
2.
fyaluation of Licensee's Design Bases of Diesel Generators (92720)
The purpose of this inspection was to evaluate the licensee's design bases document (08D-24) for the emergency diesel generators (EDGs).
In the evaluation, the inspector reviewed the licensee's references, criteria, and applicable specifications to the EDG.
In addition, the licensee's administrative, maintenance, operating and surveillance procedures were reviewed.
The review of D83-24's selected references indicated the use of various codes and standards, USNRC regulatory references, Trojan reports, vendor reports, specifications and technical requirements, vendor and Trojan correspondence, and Trojan calculations.
These references appear to be comprehensive, and extensive based on the selected sample reviewed.
According to DBD-24, the EDGs at Trojan were designed, constructed, installed, and tested in accordance with a Quality Assurance (QA) prograr that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, "Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants".
All modifications were performed in accordance with PGE-8010. "Nuclear Quality Assurance Program".
The inspector l
o
,--
-
.,,
., -
- - - _,
,
,. -, - -
--a--
-n.
-,-,...-
,.--n.--
=.--,,-,.--.r
>
.
'.
-
.
reviewed selected portions of PGE-8010, and verified the requirements were included in Bechtel Specification 6478-M-16.
The Trojan EDG system was designed to have complete redundancy as required by General Design Criteria (GDC) 17 and P.egulatory Guide 1.6.
The EDG system design basis and specification 6478 M-16 was reviewed by the inspector which verified the above redundancy requirements were specified.
j The Equipment Qualification (EQ) Program covered electric equipment beyond the scope of 10 CFR 50.49, including electric equipment important to safety in mild environments and certain post-accident monitoring equipment in harsh environments specified in Category 3, Regulatory Guide 1.97, "Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to
Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident."
These equipment categories were included in the EQ Program to ensure that all equipment qualification efforts were effectively included in the plant design.
The EDG system is required to have two separate and independent trains to support the two-train ESF loads as required by GDC 17, Regulatory Guide 1.6, and IEEE 308-1971, "Class IE Electric Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations".
Verification of the above requirements were met was performed by the review of system design basis document to assure this aspect was included.
Loading sequence requirements of the EDG was specified in Bechtel Specification 6478-M-16.
Plant Operating Test (POT) 12-2, entitled "Loss of Offsite Power" verifies the above design specification are satisfied.
System Design Bases of DPD-24 Sections 3.6.1, 3.6.2, 3.6.3, 3.6.4, and 3.6.5 described the criteria addressing flooding protection, missile protection, tornado protection, and pipe break protection.
Those sections described the design bases adequately and in sufficient detail to understand how the criteria was met.
The review of OBD-24's component design bases addressed the essential requirements for a standby power system for the Trojan Nuclear Plant.
Bechtel Specification 6478-M-16 detailed those essential requirements since it contained many of the applicable design bases for the EDG system.
The component design bases section consolidated and addressed information regarding design basis requirements for individual components within the system.
The DBD-24's component design basis are discussed in (
the following paragraphs.
The diesel engine's design requirements, and configuration were presented in DBD-24's sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2, respectively.
The design requirements were presented for the engines, their fuel system, the combustion air intake system, the speed governor, starting and acceleration to rated speed, and the engine water jacket temperature.
Specification 6478-M-16 described the majority of these requirements.
{
The diesel lube oil system has two general functions; (1) lubricate and cool various engine bearings and moving parts during operation, and (2)
I
- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
- _ - _ _ _ - _ ____ _______-___ _ -__________ - _____ __________-_____________
.
-
.
.
.
keep the shutdown engine warm, in conjunction with the jacket water cooling system, for rapid engine startup.
NUREG-0800, Section 9.5.7,
"Emergency Diesel Engine Lubrication System", requires that the lube oil system meet several criteria, and the diesel engine manufacturer designed the EDG units to meet those criteria as specified in the DBD.
Based upon the inspector's review of the component design bases, it appeared that the licensee had a complete and thorough document addrecsing the component design bases.
The inspector's review of Bechtel Specification 6478-M-16 indicated the applicable criteria, requirements, and design concepts were presented and met.
The system operation of the EDGs was presented in Section 5.0 of DBD-24 and presented the normal operation, the normal transient operation, and abnormal and emergency operations.
A brief but adequate explanation of each operation was presented.
Some items that the licensee required for resolution to be incorporated into the design basis were presented in Appendix A, entitled
"Open Items" Out of the original fourteen open items, only eight remained open and were being tracked via the Commitment Tracking Log (CTL) with scheduled and prioritized completion dates.
Examples of
-
completed items were design calculations for combustion air flow and temperature; correlation calculations indicating that a diesel engine develops 3070 bhp, which correlates to 2217 kW; high and low temperature limits for the jacket cooling water immersion electric heaters; and
!
design bases for the maximum discharge temperature of the service water coolant at the jacket water cooler.
Based upon the inspector's review of the DBD-24, "Emergency Diesel Generator System", it appeared that the licensee has documented the design basis in an accurate and thorcugh manner.
The licensee had several open items which need to be resolved to ensure a complete design basis document, but the items were being tracked and monitored.
Several items were resolved and will be instituted into the design basis document next revision.
'
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
3.
Test And Experiments Program (37703)
The purpose of this inspection was to determine whether the licer.see had a program relating to the control of test and experiments that was in conformance with regulatory requirements, commitments in the license, and industry guides and standards.
The licensee conducts special plant tests via Administrative Order (AO)-3-16, which established the controls, methods, and responsibilities for the preparation and performance of special plant tests.
By their definition, special plant tests were plant tests which fall under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59; specifically tests or experiments that are not described in the FSAR that may affect nuclear safety, or which involve a change to the Technical Specifications or an unreviewed safety question.
The inspector examined A0-3-16 for the controls necessary to ensure an effective program was in place to conduct plant tests and experiments, l'
.
'
.
.
.
and verified that effective controls and responsibilities were in place.
During this review, the inspector discovered that pertinent references from A0-3-16 were no longer valid.
In Section III, entitled
"Instruction", Paragraph A, entitled "General", the second paragraph referenced that "test results shall be qualified in accordance with Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP)-11-2." QAP-11-2 had been deleted in its entirety and its function was perfornied by A0-13-4.
Sim.larly, in Paragraph B, entitled "Preparation and Approval of Special Plant Test Procedures", the second paragraph referenced QAP-5 and QAP-11-1 which had both been deleted in their entirety.
Similarly, the reference section of A0-3-16 needed to be corrected since it referenced QAP-5, QAP-11-1, and QAP-11-2.
The correction of A0-3-16 references was presented to the office supervisor who initiated changes to A0-3-16.
The correction of A0-3-16 references will be followup open item 88-15-01..
The inspector reviewed the implemertation of the special plant test by reviewing one special plant test (SPT-48), and nine temporary plant tests.
The licensee has not conducted a special plant test in several years, but conducts temporary plant tests frequently.
The inspector's review of both kinds of te;ts indicate adequate and entensive centrols in place to ensure proper and correct performance of special and temporary plant tests.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
QA Program Measuring And Test Equipment (35750)
The purpose of th'- 'aspection was to determine whnther the licensee has developed and implaaented a Quality Assurance (QA) program relatirg to the control of measuring and test equipment (M&TE) which is is conformance with regulatory requirements, commitment in the licensee.,
and inJustry standards.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the control of l
measuring and test equipment (M&TE) via Maintenanco procedure (f;P)-2-2,
'
entitled "Portable Measuring and Test Equipment".
MP-2-2 ensured that M&TE and measurement standards were properly controlled and calibrated at specific periods to maintain accuracy within prescribed liuits.
The I
procedure detailed the responsibilities, definitions, identification I
requirements, calibration program both on-site and off-site, calibration l
schedule and interval, calibration stickers and tags, end various forms
i used in the calibration process.
The program ensured t'at each M&TE was i
i traceable to its calibration source, the as-found and as-calibrated data were identified, the standards used were identified, the date of
'
calibration and of next calibration was recorded, and the name of the
-
person performing calibration was recorded.
The inspector reviewed the implementation of the M&TE program by reviewing the calibration records for fifteen pieces of M&TE in the Instrumentation and Control (I&C) shop.
The inspector's review determined that the M&TE was properly stored, identified by a unique number; calibration status was formally maintained; calibration procedure was available and properly controlled; and that M&TE were recalled for calibration in accordance with an established schedule.
The inspector
-
. _. _
_
..
,
.
,
.
interviewed the I&C supervisor to determine if the programmical aspects of the M&Tr calibration were understood.
The I&C supervisor understood the M&TE cilibration process well.
The program included an out of calibration M&TE form to verify proper evaluation of the validity of previous tests.
The inspector reviewed completed surveillance tests and maintenance records to ensure that M&TE usage was being properly documented.
The inspector interviewed the I&C personnel performing calibrations in the I&C shop and determined that the personnel were familiar with the calibration procedures and process. Based upon the inspector's review of the M&TE program, it appeared that the licensee has an appropriate program for the calibration, control, and maintenance of M&TE.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Followup on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
Followup Item 87-39-01 (Closed) PICTS 3-1 & 3-2 Need Revising A previous inspection finding determined that Periodic Instrument and Control Tests (PICTs) 3-1 and 3-2 needed to be revised to ensure procedure clarity and correctness in operation.
The inspector was i
informed by the licensee that PICTs 3-1 and 3-2 were revised to correct the "Returning the System to Operation" section.
Specifically, paragraph 7.3.7.5 in PICT 3-2 required returning the steam dump interlock switch to
'
ON, however this interlock switch was never repositioned during the performance of the procedure nor the initial preparation.
The licensee reviewed the inspector's comment and deleted paragraph 7.3.7.5.
This followup item 87-39-01 is closed.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on April 29, 1988, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection activities.
,
_ -, -,., -. - - -. ~,. - - - -.. -. _ _. -... -,,,, -,,,,
a.
,,_--,
e
, _.-..
a