IR 05000397/1985015
| ML17277B776 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1985 |
| From: | Johnson P, Toth A, Waite R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17277B774 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-85-15, NUDOCS 8506060517 | |
| Download: ML17277B776 (16) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No: 50-397/85-15 Docket No:
50-397 Licensee:
Washington Public Power Supply System P.
O. Box 968 Richland, WA. 99352 Facility Narge: Washington Nuclear Project No.
2 (VNP-2)
Inspection at:
WNP-2 Site'near Richland, Washington Inspection Conducted: April 1 - May 3, 1985 Inspectors: ~
A.
D ot
,
nior Resident Inspector R.
S.
W te, Resident Inspector Approved by:
~/jw/zs-Date Signed
~~</a~
Date Signed
~i~/as-P.
H.
React hnson, Chief Projects Section
Date Signed Summary:
Ins ection on A ril 1 - Ma
1985 (50-397/85-15)
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspectors of control room operations, engineered safety feature (ESF)
status, surveillance program, maintenance program, licensee event reports, and licensee action on previous inspection findings.
This inspection involved 218 inspection-hours on site by two resident inspectors, including backshift work activities.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
850bOb0527 850527 PDR ADOCK 05000397
',
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Washin ton Public Power Su" l S stem D. Mazur, Managing'Director J. Martin, Assist'ant'Managing Director for, Operations-C.
M. Powers,', Plant Manager
- J.
W. Bakeq, Assistant Plant Manager R. Corcoran, Operations'anage~
K. Cowan, Technical Manage'r J.
I,andon, Maintenance Manager R. Graybeal, Health Physics and Chemistry Manager D. Feldman, Plant Quality Assurance Manager J. Peters, Administrative Manager P. Powell, Licensing Manager M. Wuesterfeld, Reactor Engineering Supervisor
- Personnel in attendance at exit meeting The inspectors also interviewed various control room operators, shift supervisors, shift managers, engineering, quality assurance, and management personnel relative to activities in progress and records.
2.
General The Senior Resident Inspector and/or the Resident Inspector were on site April 1-5, 8-12,15-19, 22-26 and 29-30.
Backshift inspections were conducted on various days'everal regional office inspectors visited the site this month for inspection activities.'hese activities were documented in other inspection reports.
These included:
A regional reactor inspector (Mr. F. Casella)
was onsite April 1-5,,
1985.
A special team inspection was conducted on-site and at the corporate office in Richland, Washington on April 15-26.
Inspection personnel included T. Young (Team Leader), J.
Crews, A. Johnson, K. Ivey, R. Kanow, C.
Sherman, and J. Burdoin.
The Senior Resident Inspector participated in this inspection as a
team member.
The Regional Administrator (J. Martin) and Acting Division Director (D. Kirsch) were on-site April 24.
The Public Affairs Officer (G.
Cook) from Region V was on-site April 2 I I
lg
I I L
3.
Plant Status The plant experienced vibration problems with one of the primary recirculation pumps early in the month, and both pumps were put on 15 Hz low speed operation with reactor power reduced to 55~/ through the end of the month. Preparations were continued for the scheduled May 3 shutdown and commencement of a two month maintenance outage.
4.
0 erations Verifications The resident inspectors reviewed the control room operator and shift manager log books on a daily'asis for this report period.
Reviews were also made of the Jumper/Lifted Lead Log and Nonconformance Report Log to verify that there were no conflicts with Technical Specifications and that the licensee was actively pursuing corrections to conditions listed in either log.
Events involving unusual conditions of equipment were discussed with the control room personnel available at the time of the review and evaluated for potential safety significance.
The licensee's adherence to Limiting Conditions for Operation (ICO's), particularly those dealing with ESF and ESF electrical alignment, were observed.
The inspectors routinely took note of activated annunciators on the control panels and ascertained that the control room licensed personnel on duty at the time were familiar with the reason for each annunciator and its significance.
The inspectors observed access control, control room manning, operability of nuclear instruments, and availability of on-site and offsite electrical power.
The inspectors also made regular tours of accessible areas of the facility to assess equipment conditions, radiological controls, security, safety and adherence to regulatory requirements.
a.
3uring a review of the required reading log maintained in the control room the inspector observed that several procedure changes, licensee event reports, and plant modifications involving safety related items had not been 'read by the designated operators and managers prior to the "expected completion date" specified on the required reading form.
Also several items remained in the log with "expected completion dates" which had expired. Similar observations by the plant quality assurance staff and Nuclear Safety Assurance Group were documented, but effective corrective measures had apparently not been implemented.
The (}A compliance engineer advised the inspector that a commitment was obtained from the Assistant
, Plant Manager to more closely monitor plant staff performance in this area and take more timely corrective steps.
This area will be routinely monitored during future inspections.
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.
At 7:12 AM, April ll the inspector observed that both on-duty reactor operators had left the approved "at the controls" boundary of the control room, to perform activities at the back panels.
The Control Room Supervisor,'ho is permitted to act for the reactor operators, was within the approved boundary, although he was engaged in conversation in the Shift Manager'
~
~
office and was apparently unaware of the operators'bsence.
An operator returned to the front panel area within about two minutes.
The inspector discussed the desirability of continuous front panel attention with the Shift Manager on duty, and with the Assistant Plant Manager, who agreed that the observed condition should be avoided.
The Assistant Plant Manager stated that management expectations regarding attention to front panels would be evaluated and reviewed with plant operations staff as necessary.
Plant management actions on this matter will be evaluated during a future inspection (85-15-01).
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Surveillance Pro ram Im lementation The inspectors ascertained that surveillance of safety-related systems or components was being conducted in accordance with license requirements.
In addition to observing and occasionally verifying daily control panel instrument checks, the inspectors observed portions of the following detailed surveillance tests by operators and instrument and control technicians:
a.
RCIC Operability Test b.
HPCS Diesel Operability Test, No violations or deviations were identfied.
6.
Monthl Maintenance Observation Portions of selected safety-related systems maintenance activities were observed.
By direct observation and review of records the inspector determined whether these activities were consistent with LCOs; that the proper administrative controls and tag-out procedures were followed; and that equipment was properly tested before return to service.
The inspector also reviewed the outstanding job orders to determine if the licensee was giving priority to safety related maintenance and to verify that backlogs which might affect system performance were not developing.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Iicensee Action On 10CFR50.55(e)
Construction, Deficienc Re orts Various construction deficiency reports were issued by the licensee during the construction phase of the project.
Those reports of conditions and corrective actions taken or planned were reviewed by NRC regional staff at the time of submission.
Fulfillment of reporting requirements, report completeness, corrective actions, generic aspects of the items, and need for onsite followup were evaluated.
Many of these reports were further examined during followup inspections of records and hardware at the sit ~
p lg
~
~
During the current period, the inspector performed a review of the VNP-2 plant files of such reports.
The purpose of this inspection was to ascertain that the plant records verify that the described corrective actions had been implemented and/or incorporated into controlled corrective action programs subject to tracking and prioritization evaluations.
The following item is considered closed as noted:
(83-09-A) (Licensee No. 286) Linear indications in containment weld ad attachment, welds.
Linear indications at the toe of welds were explored and evaluated as described in licensee reports to NRC, and as discussed in NRC inspection report 83-49.
The inspector (this period)
examined documentation of final followup actions by the licensee and the basis for the licensee determination that this matter was not reportable.
The licensee contracted with a consultant.
(APTECH) to perform fracture mechanics analyses of the defect data.
The APTECH evaluation and repair data were reviewed by NRR staff at request of the NRC Regional Office on October 28, 1983 and found acceptable March 20, 1984.
The licensee determination of non-reportability appeared appropriate.
This matter is closed.
8.
Licensee Event Re orts The inspector performed an in-office review of the following Licensee Event Reports (LERs) relative to timeliness, adequacy of description, generic implications, planned corrective actions, and adequacy of coding.
The resident inspectors reviewed selected reports and supporting information on site to verify that licensee management had reviewed the events, corrective action had been taken, no unreviewed safety questions were involved, and violations of regulations or Technical Specification conditions had been identified.
LER 85-019 Tem erature Monitorin Deficienc The inspector verified that the cause of this event was due only to a transfer of information between the deviation form and actual procedure.
LER 85-027 ESP Actuation The inspector reviewed a large sample of related 18 month surveillances and determined that this problem appeared to be an isolated incident.
The inspector verified the corrective action was instituted.
9.
Licensee Actions On Previous NRC Ins ection Findin s The inspectors reviewed records, interviewed personnel, and inspected plant conditions relative to licensee actions on previously identified inspection findings:
J
(Closed)
(83-60-01) Failure to ensure com letion of rescribed maintenance.
The licensee corrective actions were described in WPPSS letter to NRC dated March 22, 1984 and in NRC inspection report 84-06.
The licensee actions included a comprehensive review of the maintenance work request (MWR) system and inventory of MWRs compared to the computer tracking system.
During this period the inspectors examined the completed equality Assurance Surveillance Reports 2-34-034 and 2-84-190, supporting documentation for nonconformance report 284-0720, and documentation of a completed review of all open MWRs (which were logged as work c'omplete but final closeout outstanding).
These reviews demonstrated a comprehensive effort by the licensee to assure that the maintenance control documentation was complete and all associated open issues were addressed.
(Closed)
(84-01-01) Half containment isolation initiatin reactor The licensee initiated a Plant Modification Request (PMR) which modified the power supplies to the Balance of Plant Isolation I,ogic in order to prevent an isolation on loss of one RPS Bus.
This modification also prevents an isolation when transferring an RPS Bus to the Alternate Power Supply.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
(84-09-07) Revised surveillance omits ECCS room tern erature check.
Revision V to licensee procedure 7.0.0 included, as acceptance criteria for steps 34 and 36, temperature limits which are in accordance with the technical specifications.
,(Closed)
(84-.18-03) Control of um ers and lifted leads and associated inde endent verification.
Deficiencies and licensee corrective actions in this area were discussed in WPPSS letters to NRC dated September 6 and November 21, 1984, and in NRC inspection reports 84-19, 84-31 and 85-08. This period the inspector examined several revised surveillance procedures and procedure deviation forms, and plant operations committee minutes to ascertain the incorporation of independent verification provisions.
The procedures have been revised, or appropriate interim deviations appended, to include either 1) separate independent sign-off of procedure steps for returning systems or components to service, or 2) other verification means such as inability to complete the subsequent procedure steps without return of the system to proper status, or 3) steps calling for operator verification of clearing of those alarms which could not clear unless the system were properly returned to service.
Implementation of procedures with redundant verification provisions has been observed by the resident inspectors the past few report period y e
!
I
'I
~
~
The inspector also considered some recent licensee events, which involved vent and drain valves which had been left open after work was complete.
These were included in the remarks section of appropriate clearance 'orders, and had been overlooked or identification errors made by the technicians in the plant. Not all of these involved safety related systems nor the need for independent verification. The licensee corrective actions addressed this matter by including instructions in night orders for all shift managers to discuss with their operating staffs the need for verification that the requirements of the remarks section are implemented; also, the training department has included this as a topic in the current operator training cycle. This matter appears to have been resolved, in addition to the question of independent verification.
(Closed)
(84-19-01) Deliberate entr into technical s ecification action statements.
The inspectors have identified no inappropriate licensee actions in this regard.
The licensee has determined that special guidance to staff relative to this concern is not necessary.
(Closed)
(84-22-03)
Need for inde endent review of ower ascension ro ram test results details and calculations.
The licensee assigned the corporate engineering organization to conduct an independent review of the power ascension program test results.
A review procedure (TI-2.99 dated January 23, 1985)
was issued, which called for the engineer to "Review procedures, test results, data reduction methods, and analyses for technical adequacy and accuracy".
The data from 26 tests were subjected to such review and the findings presented to the Plant Technology Organization for disposition, and presented to the Plant Operations Committee for review.
The engineering organization reported that there were no items which affected the conclusions of compliance with the FSAR identified acceptance criteria. This information was used in the POC review of the final report of the power ascension test program, to be issued About May 1, 1984. This engineering review resolved the inspectors questions in this area.
(Closed)
(84-22-04)
Issuance of trainin de artment rocedures.
Completion of the plant modification record (PMR) handling system with regard to training, and action on backlogs were an unresolved matter.
This period the inspectors verified that the training department had implemented a tracking system for receiving and reviewing all PMR's to ascertain training needs, and to assure that applicable PMR's were incorporated into the training program, including special and routine training, revision of training references, and revision of simulator hardware and software.
Backlogs have been incorporated into
~
~
the system, and recent revisions of training references and the training class agenda and handout materials demonstrated current implementation of the tracking system.
The control system appears much improved for assuring that changes in plant configuration are disseminated to the operations staff on a timely basis.
A corporate training policy and procedure'anual has been issued as a framework for training department procedures.
Some procedures have been issued for defining the mechanics of conducting training department activities, although additional administrative procedure/instruction details are yet to be completed (e.g.
the PMR control process is still documented in an internal staff memorandum, which may warrant more than verbal acceptance and approval by the appropriate section supervisor).
The current activities to formally develop the program appear to be acceptable at this time.
(Closed)
(85-02-01) Off-as Pretreatment Monitor ino erable due to hi h amounts of moisture in line.
The three periods were evaluated by the health physics/chemistry staff and it was determined that the monitor was inoperable during each of the three periods.
The inspector verified that the requirements of Technical Specification 3.3.7.12, action 114 were met by the licensee during the periods.
The periods of inoperability for this instrument were not logged in the. Shift Managers log.
The subject of failure to log entry and exit i;nto and from action statements is followup to item (84-15-01).
(Closed)
(84-31-'01)
RHR valves not listed in rocedure 2.4.8.
The licensee determined that because other means of valve position indicators exists in the control room these valves are not required for inclusion in procedure 2.4.8.
10.
Mana ement Meetin An exit meeting was held May 3, to discuss the results of inspection activities this report period.
Personnel at this meeting are identified in paragraph 1, designated ("-).
In addition, the inspector met with the plant manager approximately weekly during this period, to discuss inspection finding statu e I
~
'I 0