IR 05000461/1986032

Insp Rept 50-461/86-32 on 860505-09 & 12-16.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Previous Insp Findings,Applicant Action Re TMI Action Plan Requirements & Review of Allegations

ML20205T261
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	05/28/1986
From:	Knop R, Scheibelhut C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20205T254	List: IR 05000461/1986032 ML20205T249
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-***, TASK-TM 50-461-86-32, NUDOCS 8606130087
Download: ML20205T261 (8)

Text

(, *

,

-

.

..

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-461/86032(DRP)

Docket No. 50-461 License No. CPPR-137 Licensee: Illinois Power Company 500 South 27th Street Decatur, IL 62525 Facility Name: Clinton Power Station

.

Inspection At: Clinton Site, Clinton, IL Inspection Conduct : y 9 d 12-16, 1986 Inspector: .S e hu 7 7h A

Approved By:. g.ac w .4Ch C. Knop, kd F /ST Reactor Projects Section IB Date Inspection Summary Inspection on May 5-9 and 12-16, 1986 (Report No. 50-461/86032 (DRP))

Areas Inspected: Routine safety inspection by a Regional Inspector of applicant actions on previous inspection findings, evaluation of applicant action with regard to Three Mile Island action plan requirements, and review of allegation Results: Of the three areas inspected, no violations, deviations or safety significant issues were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000461 G PDR l

l

.-- . _ _ . __ .-_ .____________a

. __ _ . .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

'

"

,

'

.

. -

DETAILS Personnel Contacted Illinois Power Company (IP)

, * W. Bell, Special Assistant to the Manager, Scheduling and Outage Management

• J. A. Brownell, Licensing Specialist

• R. E. Campbell, Director, Quality Systems and Audits

• D. P. Hall, Vice President, Nuclear

'

• E. Kant, Assistant Manager, Nuclear Station Engineering Department

. *J. E. Loomis, Construction Manager

• J.' A. Miller, Assistant Manager, Startup

• S. Perry, Manager, Nuclear Program Coordination

• W. S. Rives, Supervisor, Training Development

• F. A. Spangenberg, Manager, Licensing and Safety

• N. C. Williams, Director, Support Services

• W. Wilson, Manager, Clinton Power Station

WIPCO/Soyland Power

• J. Greenwood, Manager, Power Supply

• Denotes those attending the exit meeting.

l- The inspector also contacted others of the construction project and operations staf L Applicant Actions on Previously Identified Items (92701) (Closed) Unresolved Item (461/86008-03): The educational background

requirements and onsite training program for Shift Technical Advisor

(STA) positions did not appear to meet the objective of the TMI

.

Action Plan requirements (NUREG-0737, Item I.A.1.1) and the Policy Statement on Engineering Expertise on Shift (Generic Letter 86-04).

.i l While!the Clinton Power Station (CPS) Safety Evaluation Report (SER), NUREG-0853, documented the NRC review and conclusion that the STA program was acceptable, the applicant revised his commitment in Amendment 29, dated March 1984, to the Clinton Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The inspector was concerned that the revised program did not appear to meet all of the requirements. Region III 4 ferwarded the concerns to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) for evaluatio In a memorandum dated April 15,.1986, the NRR Director of the Division of BWR Licensing informed Region III that their review of the current CPS STA program showed it met the objective of the TMI Action Plan Requirements and the Policy Statement.on Engineering Expertise on Shift, Option 2: Dedicated STA. The staff noted that

'

the CPS STA program did not meet the criteria for Option 1:

Combined SR0/STA of the Policy Statemen The staff also noted that the " Commission Policy Statement for Training and Qualification of-2-

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

'.

-

.

,

.

Nuclear Power Plant Personnel" (50 FR 11147, March 20, 1985)

recognized industry initiatives underway to upgrade training programs and endorsed the INPO Acetaditation Progra The Policy Statement states that applicants for operating licenses will exert best efforts to have training programs ready for accreditation within two years af ter issuance of a full power license. Therefore, it can be expected that the training received by the CPS STAS will be upgraded, if necessary, to meet the guidance for training as specified in the INPO STA statement. Since CPS has implemented the dedicated STA position, this item is close (Closed) Open Item (461/86026-02): The Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) control panels in the control room contain key switches that can direct control of the EDG to the diesel generator room or the control room. The switches were labeled " local" or " remote". When a switch was in the " local" position, control was in the diesel generator roo When in the " remote" position, control was in the control roo This was considered to be confusing to the operator The applicant issued Field Engineering Change Notice No. 23023 to change the legend plates. General Electric issued Field Design Deviation Request-LH1-3788 to change the legend plates from

" Remote / Local" to " Control Room / Diesel Room". Maintenance Work Request C 01350 was issued to implement the change and was closed May 5, 1986. The installation was inspected and accepted by Quality Control on QCIP C 0135 The inspector determined by direct observation that the switch legend plates were changed to read " Control Room / Diesel Room" and considers the item close No violations or deviations were identifie '

3. Evaluation of Applicant Action with Regard to Three Mile Island (TMI)

Action Plan Requirements (25401)

The NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement issued Temporary Instruction (TI) 2514/01, Revision 2, dated December 15, 1980, to supplement the Inspection and Enforcement Manua The TI provides TMI-related inr7ection requirements for operating license applicants during the phase between prelicensing and licensing for full power operation. The TI was used as the basis for inspection of the following TMI items found in NUREG-0737, "Clarifiestion of TMI Action Plan Requirements." (Closed) Item I.A.1.1: " Shift Technical Advieor." In Inspection Report 50-461/86010, the inspector considered the item closed except for the concern expressed in open item 86008-03. Since the open item has been closed (see paragraph 2.a above), this item is now considered close (Closed) Item I.C.4: " Control Room Access." In Inspection Report 50-461/86010, the inspector determined that the administrative procedure written to implement the requirements of this item did not establish a line of succession for the person in charge of the-3-

' ~ ~

T, .

. ,

.

control room if the shift supervisor was absent or if caused by medical problem The applicant revised Administrative Procedure CPS.No. 1001.05, s " Authorities and Responsibilities of Reactor Operators for Safe Operation and Shutdown" to include a line of successio The inspector reviewed Revision 2 of the procedure, dated April 9,

,

1986 and found that it contains all of the provisions required by

. Item I.C.4. This item is closed.

j ~ (Closed) Item I.C.5: " Feedback of Operating Experience." In i Inspection Report 50-461/86010, the inspector found that the

. procedures necessary to implement the requirements of this item were in the revision proces The applicant has revised the following procedures:

(1) Licensing and Safety Procedure L.1, Revision 1, dated May 5, 1986, " Feedback Program."

) (2) Administrative Procedure'1006.04, Revision 2, dated March 14,-

1986, " Review of Operating Experiences."

(3) Administrative Procedure 1016.01, Revision 10, dated April 17, 1986, " CPS Condition Reports."

(4) Administrative Procedure 1016.04, Revision 1, dated January 29, 1986, " CPS License Event Reports (LER)."

(5) Nuclear Training Department Procedure 1.3, Revision 3, dat.ed

'

February 21, 1986, " Nuclear Training Department Review of Documents for Training Impact."

The inspector reviewed the procedures and determined that the e applicant has a program to assure that operating information pertinent to plant safety originating within and external.to the

,

applicant organization is reviewed, appropriately supplied tre plant

' operators and incorporated into training program This ite a is close (Closed) Item I.D.2: " Plant Safety Parameter Display Console." In NUREG-0737, Item I.D.2 tequired the applicant to install c safety parameter display system (SPDS) that would display to operating personnel a minimum set of parameters which define the safety status of the plant. This would be attained through continuous indication of direct and derived variables as necessary to aesess plant safety statu :

"

The technical details of the system were agreed to by the NRR staff af ter several meetings and an onsite audit. After completion, a

-

final onsite audit by the NRR staff found the system te be acceptable and meet the requirements of Item I.D.2. Section

+

7.5.3.2.4 of Supplement 5 of the CPS Safety Evaluation Report

-4-i

m - , . . . , . . - --a . ...,.-n..,--,-,,-,.>-------:----.,,.

- -

, - - - - - . , - - ,=.--- ---nr, ,..,,- n,,--------, m- , - - -- --

. _ - - .- -.

,

,

- ~

,

.

.

.

(NUREG-0853) documents the NRR activities and acceptance. This ites

is close (Closed) Item II.B.2

" Plant Shielding." In NUREG-0737, Item II.B.2 required a design review of plant shielding and environmental qualification of equipment for spaces / systems which may be used in

. post-accident operation Section 12.3.2 of the SER accepted the results of the design review and asked the Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) to verify installation of the two modifications identified in the revie This request was identified as SER Confirmatory Item (Open Item)

461/85005-3 In Inspection Report 50-461/86024(DRSS), the inspector closed the open item. Therefore this item is also close (0 pen) Item II.F.1: " Additional Accident-Monitoring Instrumentation." In NUREG-0737, Item II.F.1 required the installation of additional accident-monitoring instrumentation and their integration into emergency procedures and operator trainin This was broken down as follows: Integration into emergency procedure .- Installation of Instrumentation Noble gas monitors Iodine / particulate monitors Containment high-range gamma monitors Containment pressure Containment water level Containment hydrogen concentration During this inspection period, the inspector determined that the containment pressure, water level, and hydrogen concentration instrumentation had been satisfactorily installed as indicated belo The inspector determined by direct observation that containment pressure instrumentation was installed with the following reedout in the control room:

(1) I strip chart recorder with a range of -5 to +10 psi (2) 1 strip chart recorder with a range of +5 to +45 psi (3) 2 strip chart recorders (redundant) with a range of +45 to +80 psi This meets all of the requirements of Item II.F.1 for this inst rumentatio i-

-5-

-_

.

.

.

'

. ,

&*

The inspector determined by direct observation that containment water level instrumentation was installed with the following readout in the control room:

(1) 1 strip chart recorder with a range of 8' to 16'

(2) 1 strip chart recorder with a range of 16' to 24'

(3) 2 strip chart recorders (redundant) with a range of 15' to 20'

In addition, two strip chart recorders (redundant) were located on the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) panel with a range of 16'

to 24'.

This meets all of the requirements of II.F.1 for this instrumentatio The inspector determined by direct observation that redundant containment atmosphere hydrogen concentration monitoring instruments had been installed. In the control room, two panels contain the control and teadout for the two systems. The analog readouts indicate 0-30% hydrogen and 0-30% oxygen concentrations for both systems. Plant Operating Procedure CPS No. 3315.01, Revision 1, dated February 2, 1986, ' Containment Monitoring," contains operating instructions for the equipment in Sections 8.1.1 and 8. Since a continuous indication of hydrogen concentration is not required, this is acceptabl This meets all of the requirements of II.F.1 for this instrumentatio This item remains open pending inspection of the balance of the requirements of this ite (0 pen) Item III.A.1.2: " Upgrade Emergency Support Facilities."

This item required the establishment of an Operation Support Center (OSC), a Technical Support Center (TSC), and an Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) to provide areas from which responses to an emergency can be manage he applicant has complied with these requirements. However, the applicant requested a deferral of the NRC appraisal of the facilities until after fuel load. The NRC granted this request and incorporated it into a license condition that defers the appraisal to some time after full power is reache Therefore, this item is no longer considered a constraint on the issuance of an operating license or a full power licens No violations or deviations wert identifie i

'

-6-

.

m - - ., - - . , - - ,

.

,

'

. . l

-

e 4. Status of Open TMI Action Items (25401)

l As part of the inspection activities with respect to the TMI Action Plan items, the inspector determined the applicant's status in regard to closure of the remaining open items. These were divided into two groups. One group contains the open items that must be closed prior to issuance of an operating license. The other group contains the open items that must be closed prior to issuance of a full power licens Operating License Constraint Items The applicant considers the following ready for closure at the present tim I.A. I.C. II.E.4. II.E.4. II.E.4. II.E.4. II.F. II.F.1. II.F.1. II.F.1. The applicant estimates that the following will be ready at the times shown next to the ite I. June 1986 II.E. June 1986 11.1. June 1986 II.K.1.10 13 June 1986 Full Power License Constraint Items The applicant considers the following ready for closure at the present tim I.C.1. I.C.1. II.B. II.B.3.4 i

The applicant estimates that the following will be ready at the times shown next to the ite I. June 1986 I. must be done during power ascenston

,

II. unknown -- applicant had not had time to estimate l closure time for a new open item pertinent to this ite No violations or deviations were identified.

l i-7-i

-. . .. . . _ . .- ._ ____ _ _ _ _ . . ;.

.

5. Applicant Actions on Allegations (99014)

!

(Closed) Allegation (RIII-85-A-0163) (#164): NRC Region IV received hearsay information involving a former Clinton Power Station QC supervisor and forwarded it to Region III for information and resolution.' Individual A informed Region IV of a discussion with two Clinton QC employees, individuals B and Individuals.B and C told individual A that a QC supervisor, individual D, had instructed an unidentified QC inspector to " sign off" the visual inspection operation for an instrument tube bundle installation, thereby violating inspection procedures and falsifying QC record NRC Review The inspector contacted individual B at his home. Individual B remembered that he had a concern about the inspectability of the tub bundles after they were installed in the biological shield wall penetrations. After installation, however, he found that they could be satisfactorily inspected. He remembered individual D and said he shared his original concern with him. However, he had no knowledge of individual D telling anyone to " sign off" any required inspection Individual B had never heard of individual C. The inspector checked the applicant's employment records and found no evidenca that individual C had ever been employed at Clinto The inspector determined that this concern was simila.- to concern (2) of Allegation (RIII-84-A-0165) (#168) which was closed in Inspection Report 50-461/85022(DRS). The inspector concluded that the connern could not be substantiate Results One of the individuals (individual B) that purportedly informed another of procedure violations and falsification of records said he had no knowledge of such an attempt. He also stated that he had never heard of individual C. The inspector deternined that individual C was never employed at Clinton. Therefore, the allegation could not be substantiated. The resultant concern of the inspectability of the hardware af ter installation was also shown t o he unfounde No violations or oeviations were ident1 tie . Exit Interview The inupector met with the resident inspector and applicant representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on May 16, 1986. The resident inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The applicant acknowledged the inspector's findings. The applicant did not indicate that any of the information disclosed during the inspection could be considered proprietary in natur _

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