ML19259B636
| ML19259B636 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1979 |
| From: | Feieraband C, Warnick R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19259B634 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-282-78-23, 50-306-78-23, NUDOCS 7903130482 | |
| Download: ML19259B636 (9) | |
See also: IR 05000282/1978023
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:i n U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION III Report No.: 50-282/78-23; 50-306/78-23 Docket No.: 50-282; 50-306 License No.: DPR-42; DPR-60 Licensee: Northern States Pow + 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis , FDi 55401 Facility Name: Prairie Island, Units I and 2 Inspection At: Prairie Island Site, Red Wing, Minnesota Inspection Conducted: December 1-29, 1978 RFld fw- Inspector: C. D. Feierabend /- E d - 7 9 RFW O Approved By: R. F. Warnick, Chief /-J?d-79 Reactor Projects Section 2 Inspection Symmary Inspection on December 1-29, 1978 (Reports No. 50-282/78-23; 33-306/78-23) Areas Inspected: Routine resident inspection of plant operations, radiation protection, security, maintenance, refueling and startup activities, radio- active waste systems, calibrations, surveillance testing, followup on pre- vious inspection findings and nonroutine event reports. The inspection involved 131 inspector hours onsite by one NRC inspector. Results Of the eleven areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were found in ten areas. One item of noncompliance was found in one area (infraction, failure to follow a test procedure, Paragraph 12e). 790313 oqsggy
, DETAILS
1. Personnel Contacted
- F.
Tierney, Plant Manager J. Brokaw, Superintendent Operations and Maintenance E. Watzl, Superintendent, Plant Engineering and Radiation Protection
- A.
Hunstad, Staff Engineer R. Lindsay, Operations Supervisor J. Nelson, Maintenance Supervisor D. Schuelke, Radiation Protection Supervisor R. Warren, Office Supervisor J. Hoffman, Plant Engineer, Technical D. Mendele, Plant Engineer, Operations M. Sellman, Plant Engineer, Nuclear S. Northard, Nuclear Engineer G. Sundberg, Instrument Engineer J. Ruether, Engineer R. Hansen, Engineer D. Haugland, Engineer D. Cragoe, Shift Supervisor R. Held, Shift Supervisor P. Ryan, Shift Supe rvisor P. Valtakis, Shift Supervisor J. Lyons, Chief Electrician W. Phillips, Assistant Maintenance Supervisor
- Denotes those present at exit interview
2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings a. (Closed) Noncompliance (282/78-04). Failure to Calibrate Load Cells. The inspector verified that the load cells had been calibrated prior to start of Unit 2 refueling. b. (Closed) Noncompliance (282/78-11; 306/78-12): Failure to maintain special test records. Licensee corrective action was verified. c. (Closed) Noncompliance (282/78-11: 306/78-12): Failure to prepare a written storage procedure. Licensee corrective action was verified; however, the area of storage procedures, storage facilities, and access controls, thgy{ynot in accordance with ANS1 45.2.9-1974, remains unresolved d. (Closed) Noncompliance (282-78/14; 306-78/15): Failure to follow radiation safety procedure. Licensee corrective action was verified. 1/ IE Inspection Reports No. 050-282/77-12; 050-306/77-08. 2/ IE Inspection Reports No. 050-282/78-11; 050-30f/78-12. -2-
. b (Closed) Noncompliance (282/78-14; 306/78-15): Failure to follow e. radiation safety procedure. Licensee corrective action was verified. 3. Organization The inspector verified that there had been no recent changes in plant key supervisors and that the staff is organized as described in Tech- nical Specifications. There has been one change in the Safety Audit Committee. Mr. G. Jacobson, Superintendent Nuclear Plant Projects, was appcInted to replace M. Voth, Nuclear Safety and Technical Services Engineer, who has accepted employ- ment elsewhere. 4. Plant Operation The inspector reviewed plant operations, including examination of selected operating logs, special orders, temporary nemos, and jumper and tagout logs for the month of December. Special attention was focused on operation of Unit I during refueling and startup activities in pro- gress in Unit 2, following completion of a three week refueling outage. No items of concern were identified. 5. Security The inspector condu:ted periodic observations of access control, issuing badges, vehicle control, escorting and communication checks. No items of concern were identified. 6. Refueling Operations - Unit 2 inspector observed the status of Unit 2 systems during refueling and The performed a walk-thru of selected portions of the safety injection system and the reactor coolant system to verify that valve lineups were completed in accordance with licensee procedures. The inspector reviewed water chemistry records and determined that reactor and secondary system chemistry was within specifications for coolant startup. The inspector observed post refueling startup testing in progress, including portions of rod position indication calibrations, temperature coeff2cient measurements, and flux maps at different power levels. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. -3-
. 7. Maintenance
The inspector observed removal of the reactor upper internals. Remova' on the storage stand was accomplished in accordance with and placement the licensee's procedure No. D4 dated October 12, 1978. Precautionary measures included use of full face masks during lifting and transfer to The the storage stand, however, no airborne activity was encountered. operation was well planned, supervised and monitored. The inspector reviewed several Work Requests (WR's) and Work Request Authorizations (WRA's) and verified that all required reviews and approvals had been completed. The inspector observed work in progress during repairs to containment purge valves and during preventive maintenance performed on safeguards breakers. (FCU) dampers The inspector discussed operability of the fan coil unit Because of earlier failures with maintenance supervisory personnel. the dampers have been routinely inspected during routine containment Two of the dampers inspections conducted weekly on alternate units. I have been removed from service (blocked in the safeguards on Unit position one at a time) so that maintenance could be completed on the couplings and actuators. The licensee indicated that a study of the actuator design is being initiated to determine if changes m?.y be The inspector required to reduce maintenance and assure reliability. will follow the results of the licensees study and resolution. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. 8. Radiation Protection The inspector examined high radiation area posting and controls, verified air monitors in operation during refueling operability of constant operations, and observed operations being conducted under control of radiation work pernits. No areas of concern were identified. 9. Radioactive Waste Systems (RWS) The inspector reviewed records for RWS effluent releases for the period all releases had December 3 through December 9, 1978, determined that been authorized and accomplished in accordance with licensee approved procedures and that effluent control instrumentation was verified to be operable and in service for each release. The inspector observed operation of the RUS system during a release in progress. No items of concern were identified. _4
. s 10. Calibration The inspector selected two calibration test instruments used for calibration of plant equipment, verified that accuracy was traceable to acceptable standards, and that the calibration frequency had been met. a. PI No. 263,Wallace & Teirman Test Gauge, Range 0-40 inches water, Model No. 62C-2C-0040, Serial No. 10117 b. PI No. 55, Fluke Digital Voltemeter, 0-1000 volts d.c., Model 8100A-02, Serial No. 3094 The inspector observed calibration of accumulator level transmitters in progress and a portion of the calibration of the rod position indication system. No areas of concern were identified. 11. Surveillance Testing The inspector witnessed a portion of test SP 2085, Containment Spray Nozzle Test. The test was conducted with air flow thrcugh the spray piping and observation of deflection of helium filled balloons at each spray nozzle. Some air turbulence near the highest spray ring made testing more time consuming, however, the test results appeared to be satisfactory. 12. Licensee Event Reports (LER's) P-RO-78-19 dated October 12, 1978, Failure of NIS Power Range a. Channel 2.441. (Closed) b. P-RO-78-08 dated May 5, 1978, Bus 26 Locked Out During Electrical PM on Bus 16. (Closed) The inspectogfreviewed the operational aspects during a previous inspection. - Subsequent to submitting the LER the licensee reviewed the circuit design and determined that a similiar occur- rence would be prevented by a single design change. Design Change No. 78L-504 was reviewed, approved, and installation completed on December 11, 1978. The licensee plans to submit a revised LER. c. P-RO-78-13 dated June 16, 1978, Failure of No. 14 Fail Coil Unit Discharge Damper to Operate as Required. See discussion in paragraph 7 above. (Closed) 3/ IE Inspection Reports No. 050-282/78-04; 050-306/78-05 -5-
. - d. P-RO-78-26 dated July 28, 1977, Inoperability of No. 12 Fan Coil Unit Damper. See discussion in paragraph 7 above. (Closed) e. P-RO-78-23 dated December 20, 1978, Bus 16 Locked Out During Preventive Maintenance on Bus 25. (Closed) The inspector reviewed records and discussed the event with the plant staff and determined that the occurr ence was accurately described. The maintenance activities in progress were being performed by corporate relay test personnel, using a preventive maintenance procedure that had been properly reviewed and approved by the plant staff. The technician apparently applied the jumper believing it to be needed to perform the test, however, the jumper was not specified nor rea.uired by the procedure. This is considered to be noncompliance with Technical Specification 6.5.A. Further discussions with the plant technical staff indicated that the relay test personnel involved were familiar with plant practices based on testing done during previou, refueling and should have know the procedure for obtaining authorization for urse of a jumper. The responsible engineers indicated that the subject of strict adherence to test procedures and use of jumpers during testing would be included in pre-outage briefings of relay test personnel. 13. Exit Interview The inspector attended exit interviews conducted by IE inspectors: L. Hueter and S. DuBry en Decenber 1, 1978 1. Yin on December 1, 1978 K. Ward on December 6, 1978 The inspector conducted weekly interviews with plant management personnel and conducted an exit interview with Messrs. Tierney and Hunstad at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. One item of noncompliance, was identified (Failure to follow procedure, Paragraph 12e). Attachment: Preliminary inspection Findings -6-
OFFICE OF INSPECTION A';D ENFORCEMENT PP.ELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS i 2. REGIONAL OFFICE ' 1. LICENSEE Northern States Power Company U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com.ission 414 Nicollet Mall Office of Inspection & Enforcenent, RIII ?!inneapolis, MN 55401 799 Roosevelt Road en Ellyn, IL 60W Prairie Island 1 (Redwing, !!N) Prairie Island 2 (Redwing, MN) 3. DOCKET NDfEERS 4. LICENSE NUMBERS 5. DATE OF INSPECTION [ / ' [j [[77 50-282; 50-306 DPR-42: DPR 60 k'ithin the scope of the inspection, no items of noncompliance or deviation ] 6. were found. . --s J 7. The following matters are preliminary inspection findings: Tlese preliminary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervision / 8. the Reg'.on III Office and they will correspond with you Management at concerning any enforcement action. , A Nuclear Regulatory Co unission Inspector
" OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCE.Mty;T B PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS _ _ _ _ _ _ . . I ' ' REGIONAL OFFICE 1. LICENStr ' Northern States Power Company U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 414 Nicollet "all Office of Inspection & Enforcement, RIII '*inneapolis, M'. 55401 799 Roosevelt Road l Glen E1]yr IL 60137 Prairie Island 1 (Redwing , 5:) Prairie Island 2 (Redwing, N) j i 3. DOCKET N'JMBERS l4 LICENSE N'JMBERS 5. DATE OF INSPECTION
DPR-42: DPR 60 l /<,- /C. - ] S/ - s 50-282: 50-306 - , . t ]il 6. 'n'ithin the scope of the inspection, no itees of noncompliance or deviation > were found. - 7. The following eatters are preliminary inspection findings: ___ . . These preliminary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervision / I S. the Region III Office and they will corres and with you Management at concerning any enforcenent action. p,y , [ l'M w, Nuclear Regulatory Commissi6n Inspector
.. .. .n ON FINDINCC _ PRELIMINARY INSPECTI . _- -- .. . _ - - REGIONAL OFFICE i 2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection & Enforcement, RIII 1. LICENSEE , Northern States Power Company { 799 Roosevelt Road 414 Nicollet Mall i 55401 "" I"' Minneapolis, MN Prairie Island 1 (9edwing, MN) j Prairie Island 2 (Redwing, MN) DATE OF INSPECTION 5 LICENSE NUMBERS December 18-19 and 28-29,1978 t ~ 4. DOCKET NUMBERS DPR-42: DPR 60 ~ 3 50-282; 50-306 no items of noncompliance or deviation - '.s'ithin the scope of the inspection, ] 6. were found. inspection findings: The following matters are preliminary s requires that detailed written k ff lists and instructions covering i Section 6.5.A of the Technical Specificat on 7. procedures, including applicable chec on effect on nuclear safety testing requirements that could have a prepared and followed. 78, during relay testing on Unit 2 Contrary to the above, on Nover.ber 30,19been identified to be req an electrical jumper that had iot view and approval. BT-256 was applied without obtaining proper re be reviewed by NRC Supervision These preliminary inspection findings villd they will correspond Management at the Region III Office an 8. concerning any enforcement action. Nuclear R'egulatory Commissioh I }}