IR 05000397/1990021
| ML17286A349 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/1990 |
| From: | Johnson P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17286A348 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-90-21, NUDOCS 9010170147 | |
| Download: ML17286A349 (16) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V
Report No:
Docket No:
Licensee:
50-397/90-21 50-397 Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, WA 99352 Facility Name:
Washington Nuclear Project No.
(WNP-2)'nspection at:
WNP-2 Site near Richland, Washington Inspection Conducted:
July 30, 1990 - September 8,
1990 Inspectors:
C. J. Bosted, Senior Resident Inspector R.
C. Sorensen, Resident Inspector Approved by:
P.
.
J hnson, C ie Reacto Projects Section
< f~/~-
Date Signed Summary:
Ins ection on Jul 30 -
Se tember 8, 1990 50-397/90-21 A~
R p
by R
fd f
p f
room operations, licensee action on previous inspection findings, engineered safety feature (ESF) status, surveillance program, maintenance program, licensee event reports, special inspection topics, procedural adherence, and review of periodic reports.
During this inspection, Inspebction,'Pj;o'cedures 30703, 35502, 37828, 37700, 61702, 61705, 61706, 61707, 61726, 62703, 71707, 71710, 90712, 90713, 92700, 92701 and 92702 were covered.
Safet Issues Mana ement S stem SINS Items:
None.
Si nificant Safet Matters:
None.
Summar of Violations and Deviations:
No violations or deviations were identi ie wit in t e scope o t is report.
0 en Items Summar
5 LERs were closed.
50iOi70i47 902002 PDR ADOCK 05000357
DETAILS 1,
Persons Contacted
"J. Baker, Plant Manager C.
Edwards, equality Control Manager.
- R. Graybeal, Health Physics and Chemistry Manager
"J.
Harmon, Maintenance Manager
"A. Hosier, Licensing Manager
"D. Kobus, equality Assurance Manager-
"R. Koenigs, Technical Manager
"S.
McKay, Operations Manager
"J. Peters, Administrative Manager
"G. Gelhaus, Assistant Technical Manager W. Shaeffer, Assistant Operations Manager R. Mebring, Assistant Maintenance Manager The inspectors also interviewed various control room operators; shift supervisors and shift managers; and maintenance, engineering, quality assurance, and management personnel.
"Attended the Exit Meeting on September 7,
1990.
'
2.
Plant Status
'At the start of the inspection period, the plant had been shut down since April 20 for its annual refueling and maintenance outage.
The outage had been extended approximately 2 months because of problems with shorted windings in emergency diesel generators (EDGs) (discussed in Inspection Report No. 90-16).
This problem was corrected on the Division I EDG and all retesting was completed on August 2.
The Division II EDG was determined to be acceptable for use, and is:
scheduled for winding replacement during a future outage.
The plant was restarted on August 4 and achieved full power on August 12, where it remained through the end of the inspection period.
3.
0 erational Safet Verification (71707)
Plant Tours The following p'lant areas were toured by the inspectors during the course of the inspection:
Reactor Building Control Room Diesel Generator Building Radwaste Building Service Mater Buildings Technical Support Center Turbine Generator Building Yard Area and Perimeter
b.
The (j)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(s)
(9)
following items were observed during the tours:
0 eratin Lo s and Records.
Records were reviewed against ec naca pec>>cation an administrative control procedure requi'rements.
J
~
Monitorin Instrumentation.
Process instruments were. observed for correlation between channels~nd for conformance'with Technical Specification requirements.
Shift Mannin
.
Control room and shift manning were observed or con ormance with 10 CFR'0.54.(k),
Technical SpecHica-tions, and administrative procedures.
The attentiveness of the operators was observed in the execution of their duties, and the control room was observed to be free of distractions such as non-work related radios and reading materials.
E ui ment Lineu s.
Valves and electrical breakers were vers se to e
1n the position or condition required by Technical Specifications and administrative procedures for the applicable plant mode.
This verification included routine control board indication reviews and conduct of partial system lineups.
Technical Specification limiting conditions for operation were verified by direct observation.
E ui ment Ta in
.
Selected equipment, for which tagging requests a
een initiated, was observed to verify that tags were in place and that the equipment was in the condition specified.
General Plant E ui ment Conditions.
Plant equipment was o serve or 1n 1catlons o
system leakage, improper lubrica-tion, or other conditions that would prevent the system from fulfillingits functional requirements.
Annunciators were observed to ascertain their status and operability.
Fire Protection.
Fire fighting equipment and controls were
~bf f
ih dpi < o og> ca protec ion practices to >determine whether the licensee's program was being 'implemented
'in'onformance with facility policies and pr'ocedures and'1n compliance with regulatory requirements.
': The inspectors also observed compliance with Radiation Exposure-Permits,~;proper wearing of protective equipment and personnel monitoring devices, and personnel frisking practices.
Radiation monitoring equipment was frequently monitored to verify operability and adherence to calibration frequenc (10) Plant Kousekee in
.
Plant conditions and material/equipment storage were o served to determine the general state of cleanliness and housekeeping.
Housekeeping in the radio-logically controlled area was evaluated with respect to controlling the spread of surface and airborne contamination.
(11) ~Securit
.
The inspectors periodically observed secunity pract)ces to ascertain that the licensee's implementation of the security plan was in accordance with site. procedures, that search equipment at the access control points was operational, that vital area portals were 'kept locked and alarmed, -,that personnel allowed access to the protected area were badged and monitored, and that monitoring equipment was functional.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
En ineered Safet Feature S stem Malkdown (71707 71710)
Selected engineered safety feature systems (and systems important to safety) were walked down by the inspectors to confirm that the systems were aligned in accordance with plant procedures.
During the walkdown of the systems, items such as hangers, supports, electrical power supplies, cabinets, and cables were inspected to determine that they were operable and in a condition to perform their req'uired functions.
The inspectors also verified that the system valves were in the required position and locked as appropriate.
The local and remote position
'indication and controls were also confirmed to be in the required position and operable.
Accessible portions of the following systems were walked down on the indicated dates.
~Sstem Diesel Generator Systems, Divisions 1, 2, and 3.
Hydrogen Recombiners Low Pressure Coolant Injection (LPCI),
Trains "A", "B", and "C" Low Pressure Core Spray (LPCS)
High Pressure Core Spray (HPCS)
Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC)
Scram Discharge Volume System Standby Liquid Control (SLC) System 125V DC Electrical Distribution, Divisions 1 and
Dates August 28, Sept.
August 19, 28, Sept.
,August 19 August 19
'August 19 August 19 August 19, 28;qSept.
August 19, 28, Sept.
August 19, 28, Sep Cl pt
250V DC Electrical Distribution No violations or deviations were identified.
August 19, 28, Sept.4 5.
Survei 1 1 ance Testin (61726 Surveillance tests required to be performed by the Technical Specifica-tions (TS) were reviewed on a sampling basis to verify that:
(1) the surveillance tests were correctly included on the facility schedule; (2) a technically adequate procedure existed for performance of the surveillance tests; (3) the surveillance 'tests had been performed at the frequency specified in the TS; and (4) test results satisfied acceptance criteria or were properly dispositioned.
Portions of the following surveillance tests were observed by the inspectors on the dates shown:
P d
~d 7.4.1.3.2 Contr ol Rod Drive (CRD)
Scram Timing 7.4.8. 1. 1.2. 1 EDG Division I Monthly Operability Test
~
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Plant Maintenance (62703)
Dates Performed August 8 July 31, August 1,
During the inspection period, the inspectors observed and reviewed documentation associated with maintenance and problem investigation activities to verify compliance with regulatory requirements and with administrative and maintenance procedures, required gA/gC involvement, proper use of safety tags, proper equipment alignment and use of jumpers, personnel qualifications, and proper retesting.
The inspectors verified that reportability for these activities was correct.
The inspectors witnessed portions of the following maintenance activities:
Descri tion
" Dates Performed Reconnect Electrical Terminations to DIV I EDG per AS 5869 DIV I EDG Voltage Drop Test per AS 6618 d
L Qd+
No violations or deviations were identified.
July 29
'
<<August 2
Evaluation of Licensee ualit Assurance Pro ram Im lementation (35502)
A review was conducted of various sources including licensee event reports (LERs),
Open Items, Licensee responses to NRC inspection findings, and NRC inspection reports for the past year.
The objective, of the review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the licensee s
implementation of the gA program and to determine whether, based on this evaluation, a followup regional inspection. is warranted.
The review was used to assess trends or overall problems in the various plant disci-plines, and to determine whether these trends were the result of gA program implementation.
Since the 1989 advent of the Problem Evaluation Request (PER) program, the licensee has become more effective at identifying plant problems.
The effectiveness of corrective actions and the timeliness.thereof are still problem areas periodically.
Fewer events are observed to be attributable to the operators, indicating an improving trend.
Although a number of maintenance problems have been identified by the NRC, the licensee has initiated actions during the past year to deal with these weaknesses.
Plant management has also been noted to respond more positively to findings by the quality oversight groups than in the past.
The quality of the audits, surveillances and root cause analyses conduc-ted by the quality oversight groups in the past year has generally been noteworthy.
Some plant problems have escaped their notice, although this does not appear to indicate a negative performance trend.
Based on this review it is concluded that the licensee continues to implement the gA program adequately.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Installation and Testin of Modifications (37828 The inspector selected a sample of four plant modification records (PHRs) for review.
PMRs are the vehicle by which the licensee initiates and approves plant modifications for installation.
In conjunction with the basic design change and the implementing maintenance work requests (NWRs), the PMR installs the modification, establishes proper testing, and ensures changes to procedures and drawings, as..applicab'le.
The objective of the review was to verify that each PHR was properly-installed, that proper installation testing was conducted, and;that.any required preoperational testing or startup testing was accomplished.
Four representative PHRs were selected, three from the mechanical discipline and one from electrical.
Portions of the modifications"were observed in the field to ascertain conformance with the design.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Desi n
Desi n Chan es and Modifications 37700)
A number of design changes and modifications installed during the annual refueling outage were selected for review for conformance with the
requirements of the Technical Specifications,
CFR 50.59, the Safety An'alysis Report, and the licensee's equality Assurance Program.
These modifications were selected based on their safety significance.
In addition to the above requirements, compliance with the licensee's modification procedure 1.4. 1, "Plant Modifications," was also verified.
The following plant modification requests (PMRs) were examined:
PMR
~Di ti 88-301 Upgrade Reactor Protective System Power Supply 89-021 Anticipated Transient Mithout Scram (ATWS)86-501 Removal of Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System Condensing Mode Capability The review of the PMRs included an examination of the controlling maintenance work requests and the basic design change packages.
These packages had been completed and were examined in the records storage area.
Documents examined included a review record by the onsite and offsite reviewers, 50.59 reviews, and documented drawing changes.
The inspector also reviewed the records of operator training for PMR 88-301.
All records for the above modifications were signed off in accordance with the licensee's procedures, with appropriate referral to the NRC for
'the ATMS modification.
Post-installation testing was also reviewed and found to be appropriate.
Field change requests were included in the review.
It was noted that performance of PMR 88-301 resulted in a number of isolations of the RHR system, an issue which was resolved during the outage (these isolations were discussed in Inspection Report No. 397/90-10).
During the inspector's review of the above PMRs, the documentation was found to be complete.
A walkdown of the available equipment indicated that it had been installed in accordance with the procedures.
No violation or deviations were identified.
Core Power Distribution Incore Detector Calibrati'on :and Core.
erma ower va uatson P
During power escalation following the refueling outage,,the inspector reviewed, on several occasions, the results of core power'%distribution measurements calculated by the plant computer.
These were."al,l deter-'ined to be satisfactory.
The final core power distribution was performed after the plant attained 100'ower and reached equilibrium xenon.
After achieving this power level, the reactor'power',calculations were performed to routinely assess core parameters.
The local".power'ange monitors (LPRMs) were calibrated using the traversing incore probes (TIPs) and the on-demand computer program (OD-1), and the various LPRMs were used to calculate local in-core condition The inspector reviewed the computer outputs for the various hourly calculations using the calibration values obtained from the OD-1.
No discrepancies were noted.
No violation or deviations were identified.
ll.
Review of Shutdown Mar in Determination (61707 I
The inspector reviewed the licensee's initial shutdown margin determi-nation after refueling.
This was performed just after criticality was achieved on August 4.
The highest worth control rod was analyt'ically determin'ed by the fuel vendor; the Technical Specification required shutdown margin is 0.38K delta K.
PPM 7.4. 1. 1 was the licensee's implementing procedure for this surveillance.
The inspector reviewed the completed procedure, and verified certain assumptions made in the calculation by reviewing fuel vendor submittals.
From information supplied in the surveillance, the inspector independently calculated the shutdown margin.
The inspector's calculation gave the same value as that determined by the licensee, and was well within the requirement.
No violations or deviations were identified.
12.
Licensee Event Re ort (LER) Followu (90712 92700)
The following LERs associated with operating events were reviewed by the inspectors.
Based on the information provided in the reports it was
'concluded that reporting requirements had been met, root causes had been identified, and corrective actions were appropriate.
The below LERs are closed.
LER Number LER 89-01-01 LER 90-10 4,ER 90-11 LER 90-12 LER 90-13 Descri tion Unanalyzed Failure Modes for Containment Nitrogen System Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Actuation Caused by Inadequate Mork Controls HPCS Suction Valve Switchover Fire in Division 1 Diesel Generator Bearing ESF Actuation Due to Breaker Trip No violations or deviations were identified.
13.
Review of Periodic and S ecial Re orts 90713
- f(
Periodic and special reports submitted by the licensee pursuant to Technical Specifications 6.9. 1 and 6.9.2 were reviewed by the inspector.
This review included the following considerations:
the report contained the information required to be reported by NRC requirements; test
results and supporting information were consistent with design predic-tions and performance specifications; and the reported information appeared valid. Within the scope of the above, the following report was reviewed by the inspectors.
Monthly Operating Report for July 1990 No violations or deviations were identified.
14.
Exit Meetin 30703)
The inspectors met with licensee management representatives periodically during the report period to discuss inspection status, and an exit meet-ing was conducted with the indicated personnel (refer to paragraph 1) on September 7, 1990.
The scope of the inspection and the inspectors'indings, as noted in this report, were discussed with and acknowledged by the licensee representatives.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the information reviewed by or discussed with the inspector during the inspection.