ML18045A458
| ML18045A458 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 06/20/1980 |
| From: | Boyd D, James Heller, Jorgensen B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18045A456 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-80-08, 50-255-80-8, NUDOCS 8008070564 | |
| Download: ML18045A458 (11) | |
See also: IR 05000255/1980008
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT .
REGION III
Report No. 50-255/80-08
Docket No. 50-255
Licensee: Consumers Power Company
212 West Michigan Avenue
Jackson, MI 49201
Facility Name: Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant
Inspection At: Covert, MI 49201
License No. DPR-20
Inspection Conducted: May 5-9, 12-16, and 19-30, 1980
~cl
Inspectorsj/ B. L. Jorgensen
rH..t
~~vi
f'-' J. ~{r ,;£
Approved By:
D. C. Boy~hief
Reactor Projects,
Section 3-1
Inspection Summary
6-'20 -80
G -20- ea
/)
. .., 0.
c
~1
o-'-
-oC>
Inspection during May, 1980 (Report No. 50-255/80-08)
Areas Inspected: Routine Resident Inspection Program for May, 1980,
including: operational safety; operational and refueling surveillance
review and observation; reportable events; IE Bulletins; plant trip
review; startup testing; licensee onsite review committees; core physics;
small-break LOCA items; cleanliness; radiation protection; and plant
physical protection. The inspection entailed 201 onsite inspection hours
by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Twelve areas were inspected with no noncompliance identified in
nine areas and one noncompliance item identified in each of the remaining
three areas )Infraction - operation with insufficient instrumentation -
Paragraph 5; Deficiency - improper shift turnover record - Paragraph 2;
Deficiency - failure to appoint alternate onsite review committee members
in writing - Paragraph 8).
80 0 8 0 '7*0 S&r/
1.
DETAILS
Persons Contacted
- J. G. Lewis, General Manager
- H. J. Palmer, Technical Superintendent
- W. S. Skibitsky, Operations Superintendent
- H. J. R. Pettijean, Technical Engineer
- J. A. Meineke, Technical Engineer/Reactor Engineer
- D. W. Langschwager, Shift Supervisor
A. F. Brookhouse, Shift Supervisor
R. E. Mieras, Shift Supervisor
G. Ghidotte, Shift Supervisor
D. W. Kaupa, Shift Supervisor
E. I. Thompson, Shift Supervisor
A. S. Kanicki, Shift Supervisor
D. M. Kennedy, Associate Engineer
J. H. Dearth, Instrument and Control Supervisor
W. A. Staley, Instrument and Control Supervisor
A. D. Kowalczuk, Radiation Protection/Chemistry Superintendent
Numerous other members of the operations, technical, radiation pro-
tection and administrative staffs were also contacted briefly.
- Denotes those present at Management Interview on May 30, 1980.
2.
Operational Safety Verification
The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable
logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during
the month of May, 1980.
The inspector verified the operability of
selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified
proper return to service of affected components.
Tours of both the
reactor building and turbine building were conducted to observe
plant equipment conditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid
leaks, and excessive vibrations the station security plan.
These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that faci-
lity operations were in conformance with the requirements estab-
lished under technical specifications, 10 CFR, and administrative
procedures.
During one control room tour, the inspector noted an actual instru-
ment alarm setpoint (TIC 0201 - regenerative heat exchanger outlet
temperature) inconsistent with the setpoint as stated in the alarm
response procedure and in the plant instrument index. Though there
are not license conditions concerning the instrumentation, the
- 2 -
,. *
licensee recalibrated the device and reset the alarm setpoint con-
sistent with the stated references.
The licensee's Administrative Procedures in Section 4.0, Paragraph
5.2.1.2, address shift turnover requirements for operators. One of
these requirements is review of and signing of a control operators'
turnover checklist by the oncoming control operator, prior to assum-
ption of shift duties. S~lected turnover checklists were reviewed,
the inspector noting one oncoming "B" shift control operator did not
sign the turnover checklist on May 29, 1980.
In that adherence to
the referenced procedure is a requirement of Technical Specification 6.8.1, failure to sign the turnover checklist is an item of non-
compliance. This item is a Deficeincy.
No other items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in
this area.
3.
Monthly Surveillance Observation
The inspector observed technical specifications required surveil-
lance testing on selected systems or components and verified that
test1ng was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, that
test instrumentation was calibrated, that limiting conditions for
operation were met, that removal and restoration of the affected
components were accomplished, that test results conformed with
technical specifications and procedure requirements and were re-
viewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test,
and that any deficiencies identified during the testing were proper-
ly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel.
Specifically, the following test procedures were reviewed and all or
part of the testing witnessed:
RI-4,
Q0-8,
R0-21,
R0-22,
M0-17,
"Steam Generator Level Trip Circuit"
"ESS Check Valve Operability Test"
"Control Rod Drive System Interlocks"
"Rod Drop Test"
"Component Cooling Water Pumps Oper ability Test"
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Licensee Event Reports Followup
Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel,
and review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to
determine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate
corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent
recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifi-
cations.
- 3 -
a.
LER 80-04; Containment spray pumps inoperable during perfor-
mance of a TS Surveillance Test. Performance of TS Surveillance
Procedure M0:-19, "In Service ""Test of Containment Spray Pumps,"
required isolation of both containment spray headers which
violates an L.C.O. by incapacitating the three containment
spray pumps. The procedure was rewritten, prior to next use, to
assure that cco's are not violated.
This item is closed.
b.
LER 8082: Hydraulic snubber failed test criteria.
Bergen-
Patterson snubber (model HSSA-50, serial number 6), located on
the main steam line, failed to meet test acceptance criteria.
The snubber was replaced with an identical operable unit prior
to startup.
This item is closed.
c.
LER 79-44: Sodium Hydroxide addition system not returned to
service. Upon completion of TS Surveillance Procedure A0-3,
"Shutdown Cooling System Leak Test," two valves were left in
the closed position, such that the Sodium Hydroxide addition
system was not returned to service. The discrepancy was dis-
covered and the system restored prior to exceeding an LCO.
Occurrance resulted from inadequate return to service require-
ments in surveillance procedure A0-3.
The procedure has been
revised.
This item is closed.
d.
LER 79-12: Shutdown Margin violated. Shutdown margin for three-
loop operation was momentarily violated when an operator inadver-
tantly stopped a primary coolant pump during four-loop
operation. The reactor immediately tdpped and the primary
coolant system was borated to increase the shutdown margin.
The licensee has *submitted a Technical Specification change
(dated May 5, 1980) to allow three-loop operation while the
shutdown margin is being increased.
This item is closed
pending approval of the TS change.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
S.
IE Bulletin Followup
For the IE Bulletins listed below the inspector verified that the
written response was within the time period stated in the bulletin,
-
4 -
. *
that the written response included the information required to be
reported, that the written response included adequate corrective
action commitments based on information presentation in the bulletin
and the licensee's .response, that information discussed in the
licensee's written response was accurate, and that corrective action
taken by the licensee was as described in the written response.
IEB 79-03 and 79-03A: "Longitudinal Weld Defects in ASME SA-312,
Type 304 Stainless Steel Pipe."
IEB 79-27: "Loss of Non-class-1-E Instrumentation and
Control Power System Bus During Operation."
The
review of this item included specific verification .
of compliance to an NRC Confirmatory Order dated
April 22, 1980, as described in the licensee's
letter dated ~ay 20, 1980. Procedures prepared
pursuant to compliance with the Confi~matory Order
were also reviewed, as follows:
ONP 24.1, "Loss of Pref erred A.C. Bus Y-10"
ONP 24.2, "Loss of Pref erred A.C. Bus Y-20"
ONP 24.3, "Loss of Pref erred A.C. Bus Y-30"
ONP 24.4, "Loss of Pref erred A.C. Bus Y-40"
ONP 24.5. "Loss of Instrument A.C. Bus Y-01"
The procedures were determined to be technically adequate, but
certain clarifications concerning "action statements" for loss
of instrumentation associated with the respective busses were
needed and are being pursued.
In review of this matter, the
inspector noted Technical Specification Table, 3.17.4 stipu-
lated J.our operable high-pressure safety injection flow instru-
ments are required (one is associated with each preferred bus)
or action must be taken toward plant shutdown. Subsequent
review of the record on instrument maintenance showed one
instrument (FI-0312) was inoperable from about March 2, 1978,
to about May 8, 1979, leaving only three operable HPSI flow
instruments," and action for plant shutdown was not taken.
Failure to meet the "action statement" for insufficient oper-
able instrumentation is an item of noncompliance and is an
infraction.
IEB 80-03: "Loss of Charcoal from Absorber Tray Cells" Review
of this item included verification that the matters
not addressed in the licensee's response, dated
May 15, 1980, are not applicable to the Palisades
Plant.
- 5 -
' *
IEB 80-04: "Analysis of a PWR Main Steam Line Break with Con-
tinued Feedwater Addition"
IEB 80-05: "Vacuum Conditions Resulting in Damage to Chemical
Volume Control System (CVCS) Holdup Tanks"
The inspector has no further questions concerning any of the above
items; they are considered closed.
One item of noncompliance and no deviations were identified in this
area.
6.
Plant Trips
Following the plant trip on May 27, 1980. at 0751 EDT, due to elec-
trical noise spikes in the reactor protection system from heavy
345kv switchyard operations, the inspector ascertained the status of
the reactor and safety systems by observation of .control room indi-
cators and discussions with licensee personnel concerning plant
parameters, emergency system status and reactor coolant chemistry.
The inspector verified the establishment of proper communications
and reviewed the corrective actions taken by the licensee.
All systems responded as expected, and the plant was returned to
critical at 1333 EDT the same day, for continued startup testing
(see next paragraph).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Startup Testing - Refueling
The inspector observed the tests or other activities listed below
and verified that the refueling outage startup testing was conducted
in accordance with technically adequate procedures and that the
facility was being operated within license limits.
Selected surveil
lance testing also examined as startup rerequisites is discussed
under Paragraph 3, above.
Checklist CL 3.3, "Containment Integrity"
Checklist CL16,
"Component Cooling Water"
Checklist CL 7.1, "Main Steam System"
Special Test T-95, "Initial Approach to Critical for a New
Palisades Core"
IEB 80-04: "Analysis of a PWR Main Steam Line Break with Con-
tinued Feedwater Addition"
IEB 80-05: "Vacuum Conditions Resulting in Damage to Chemical
Volume Control System (CVCS) Holdup Tanks"
The inspector has no further questions concerning any of the above
items; they are considered closed.
One item of noncompliance and no deviations were identified in this
area.
6.
Plant Trips
Following the plant trips on May 27, 1980. at 0751 EDT, due to elec-
trical noise spikes in the reactor protection system from heavy
345kv switchyard operations, the inspector ascertained the status of
the reactor and safety systems by observation of control room indi-
cators and discussions with licensee personnel concerning plant
parameters, emergency system status and reactor coolant chemistry.
The inspector verified the establishment of proper communications
and reviewed the corrective actions taken by the licensee.
All systems responded as expected, and the plant was returned to
critical at 1333 EDT the same day, for continued startup testing
(see next paragraph).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Startup Testing - Refueling
The inspector observed the tests or other activities listed below
and verified that the refueling outage startup testing was conducted
in accordance with technically adequate procedures and that the
facility was being operated within license limits.
Selected surveil
lance testing also examined as startup rerequisites is discussed
under Paragraph 3, above.
Checklist CL 3.3, "Containment Integrity"
Checklist CL16,
"Component Cooling Water"
Checklist CL 7.1, "Main Steam System"
Special Test T-95, "Initial Approach to Critical for a New
Palisades Core"
- 6 -
Special Test T-131A, "Steam-Driven AFW Pwnp P-8B Endurance
Test"
Special Test T-130, "Feedwater Line Water Hammer Test"
No technical deficiencies were noted in the checklists or pro-
cedures.
Editorial matters were identified to and corrected by the licensee
by proper implementation of temporary procedure changes.
The feed-
water hammer testing did show water-hammer at elevated cold feed-
rates and was therefore terminated incomplete.
Further startup testing reviewed is properly characterized as core
physics testing and is discussed in Paragraph 9, below.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Onsite Review Committee
The inspector examined the onsite review functions conducted during
the period 3/80 - 5/80 to verify conformance with technical specifi-
cations and other regulatory requirements.
This review included:
administrative procedure governing review group activities; review
group membership and qualifications; review group meeting frequency
and quorum; and, activities reviewed including proposed technical
specification changes, proposed procedure changes and proposed tests
and experiments conducted per 10 CFR 50.59.
During a review of Plant Review Committee (PRC) membership and
qualification, the inspector noted that TS 6.5.1.3 requires alter-
nate members be appointed in writing by the PRC Chairman to serve on
a temporary basis.
Review of the minutes for two PRC meetings held
on May 5, 1980 reveals that the PRC Chairman failed to designate, in
writing, the alternate members.
Failure to designate alternate members is a noncompliance with the
referenced TS and is classified as a Deficiency.
The inspector also observed that the policy for designating alter-
nates was written to obtain the required quorm and not the cross
section of plant personnel as implied by the composition of the PRC
per TS 6.5.11.
This policy was discussed with plant management
during the exit interview.
One item of noncompliance (deficiency) was noted for this inspection
area.
- 7 -
9.
Reactor Physics
The inspector observed the performance of selected tests and veri-
fied that the tests were performed in accordance with technically
adequate and approved procedures.
Verification that the test data
and results met acceptance critieria and that deficiencies were
resolved in a timely manner will be reviewed and documented in a
future inspection.
The Test Procedures Reviewed:
T-119, "Low Power Test Program for Palisades Core 4"
T-120, "Base Power Level Selection"
T-121, "Zero Power Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Meas-
urement"
T-122, "Zero Power Rod Worth Measurements"
T-124, "Center Rod Worth and Zero Power Symmetry Check"
The Tests Observed:
T-119, "Low Power Test Program for Palisades Core 4"
T-121, "Zero Power Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Meas-
urements"
T-122, "Zero Power Rod Worth Measurements"
T-124, "Center Rod Worth and Zero Power Symmetry Check"
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
10.
Small-Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident Items
This inspecti6n included final review of licensee a£}ivities not
completed and reviewed during a previous Inspection- on matters
relating to coping with small-break LOCA's.
Specifically, comple-
tion of training of licensed personnel; and provision of time and
individualized instruction as necessary for upgrading SRO famili-
arity with new procedures on small-break LOCA's, were examined.
The
licensee's actions on these matters were found acceptable; the items
are considered closed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1/
IE Inspection Report No. 50-255/80-06
- 8 -
11.
Cleanliness
Final inspection of the containmenZ/building cleanup effort, left
open during a previous inspection-
was completed during this
inspection with no problems identified.
This matter is considered closed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
12.
Radiation Protection Operations
The inspectors reviewed radiation protection activities to determine
compliance to selected requirements. Portable instrumentation, area
monitors and samplers availability, operability and calibration were
selectively examined. Exposure control under radiation work permits
(RWP's) was reviewed, as was selective worker compliance to RWP
requirements. Compliance to high .radiation area posting and control
and to 10 CFR 19 posting requirements was also selectively examined.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
13.
Security-Physical Barriers
The inspectors verified by observation during plant and area tours
that protected area gates and vital area doors were closed and
locked or were attended by security force personnel. Isolation zones
were also observed and determined free of visual obstructions.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
14.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-
graph 1) throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspec-
tion on May 30, 1980, and summarized the scope and findings of the
inspection activities.
a.
The three noncompliance items were specifically identified and
discussed, the licensee acknowledging the items.
b.
Clarification of off-normal procedures for less of 120v power
was reviewed.
2/ Ibid
- 9 -
c.
The inspector noted questions remaining from previous inspec-
tions concerning reactor building cleanup and small-break LOCA
training were considered closed after reviews performed during
this inspection.
d.
The intent of Technical Specifications concerning use of alter-
nate members on the Plant Review Committee was discussed.
- 10 -