ML20058A272
| ML20058A272 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 10/12/1978 |
| From: | Boyter N, Johnson W, Madsen G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058A267 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-78-12, NUDOCS 7811280062 | |
| Download: ML20058A272 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000285/1978012
Text
.
_
_. .
d
,
-.
. - . . . . - . _ - -
-
d
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF IllSPECTION Atl0 ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report flo. 50-285/78-12
Docket flo. 50-285
License flo. DPR-40
l
Licensee: Omaha Public Power District
1623 Harney Street
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
.
Facility flame: Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1
Inspection At: Fort Calhoun Station, Blair, Nebraska
Inspection Conducted: September 17-20, 1978
Inspectors:
I@cc8cw/M
/d/b2 /7g
'W. D. Johnson, Reac' tor Inspector
Date
M
10[12 /~19
N. C. Royter, Reactor Inspector
Date
Approved By:
M
/0
r./78
~ G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Operations
Date
and fluclear Support Branch
Inspection Sunwary
Inspection on September 17-20,1978 (Report flo. 50-285/78-12)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection cocrencing on a weekend
backshif t of review cccnittee activities, internal audits, plant conditions
observed during a plant tour; and follow up on open items, licensee event
reports, and items of noncompliance. The inspection consisted of 25
inspector-hours on-site and 18 inspector-hours at the corporate office by
two (2) NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or
deviations were identified in three areas and two apparent items of noncom-
pliance (infractions) were identified in one area (Failure to adhere to
procedures - paragraph 3.b and 3.c; and failure to ccmply with Technical
Specifications requirement for one Safety Audit and Review Consnittee audit -
paragraph 3.a).
- 811280c6L
,
,
_ . - -
--
-
__
,
..
.
.
. - - _ _ _ _
____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
.
.
-2-
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
R. L. Andrews, Plant Manager
- J. Bentzinger, Acting QA Manager
L. J. Dugger, Reactor Engineer
J. J. Fisicaro, Supervisor, Administrative
F. F. Franco, Supervisor, Chemical & Radiation Control
J. F. Gass, Training Coordinator
W. G. Gates, Supervisor, Operations
J. M. Gloshen, QA Engineer
- T. P. Harding, Section Manager, Technical Services
R. L. Hyde, QA Inspector
R. F. Johnston, Shift Supervisor
D. W. Jones, Supervisor, Maintenance
- W. C. Jones, Section M1 nager, Operations
L. T. Kusek, Supervisor, Technical
M. J. McFadden, Plant Engineer
R. F. Mehaffey, Electrical Engineer
'
- K. J. Morris, Manager, Administrative Services
G. R. Peterson, Supervisor. I&C and Electrical
- S. C. Stevens, Manager, Operations, Technical Support Services
F. A. Thurtell, Division Manager of Envirormental & Regulatory Affairs
J. Woods, QA Auditor
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Review Comnittee Activities
The inspector reviewed the activities of the Plant Review Committee
(PRC) and the Safety Audit and Review Committee (SARC) to ascertain
whether they are conducted in conformance with the requirements of
the Technical Specifications. Requirements checked included meeting
frequency and quorum, test and experiment review, noncompliance
review, Technical Specification change review, facility operations
review and reportable occurrence review. No items of noncompliance
or deviations were identified in this portion of the inspection.
3.
Internal Audits
The inspector reviewed the licensee's internal audits conducted from
October 1977 to the present to verify that they were conducted in
accordance with the licensee's Technical Specifications, Quality
Assurance Manual, and Quality Assurance Procedures (QAP's) 14,16,
17 and 18.
-
_
-
.
.
-3-
a.
Safety Audit and Review ~Corrmittee~ (SARC) Audits
The inspector reviewed the SARC Audit reports for 1977 and 1978
and the records of audits for 1976. The Technical Specification 5.5.2.8.b requires that the SARC perfom an audit of the per-
famance, training, and qualification of the entire facility staff
at least once per year. This specification, at a minimum,
requires that at least two of these audits should have been com-
pleted since January 1976. Contrary to this requirement, this
i
audit was perfomed only once (January 1977) during the period
from January 1976 to the present. The licensee's failure to
j
adhere to the requirements for an annual SARC audit of perfomance,
training, and qualification of the facility staff constitutes an
apparent item of noncompliance with Section 5.5.2.8.b of the
l
Technical Specifications.
b.
Quality Assurance Audits
The results of the inspector's review of the reports and records
of the Quality Assurance Audits prescribed in Quality Assurance
Procedure (QAP) 16 are as follows:
(1) Section 3.1 of QAP 16 requires an internal audit on Handling
and Storage of QA Records on an annual basis, and an internal
audit on Fuel Handling / Fuel Management during refueling
periods. The review of records provided documentation of
!
>
completion of the audit on Handling and Storage of QA Records
.
in August 1976 and February 1978, but not in 1977. The
licensee's failure to perfom this Quality Assurance Audit
t
,
'
on Handling and Storage of QA Records in 1977 as required by
,
QAP 16 is an apparent item of noncompliance with Criterion V
of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 as amplified by Section 17.5 of the
i
licensee's f1RC approved QA Program. fleither the audit plan
nor audit report could be located for the audit of fuel
<
Handling / Fuel Management in 1977. A licensee representative
stated that the audit material had been misplaced and will be
located. This item has been identified as an unresolved item
(Unresolved Item 7812-1).
(2) The review of responses to the Quality Assurance Audits was
i
hampered by the lack of adequate records and lack of unifom
methods of response to the audits. Section 3.8.1 of QAP 17
requires a written response to adverse audit findings within
30 days after receipt of the report. The following audit
,
reports had no record of responses but a ccmputer printout
listed the status of each audit as " Corrective Action Pending":
I
!
!
. - .
.-. ,
,
- -
-
-- -
..
. .
.
.
_ _ _
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _
_______ _ _____ _ _______
.
.
-4-
4-78 Surveillance Testing / Technical Specifications,
February 28, 1978
11-78 Calibration Control, April 13, 1978
21-78 Product Control / Receiving Inspection,
June 7, 1978
These itsted audit reports contain instructions to respond
in 30 days to the listed QA Deficiency Reports which were
prepared on deficient items identified by the audit.
According to a licensee representative, the response may
be either a letter written in response to the report or a
written response on the space provided on the QA Deficiency
Report fom. The instructions for use of the Deficiency
Report in Section 3.6.6 of QAP 15 prescribes the use of the
fom itself for response and followup. Therefore, the
expected means of response, verification of timeliness of
responses, and the means of maintaining adequate records of
the status of audit responses and followup actions were not
clear to the inspector. A licensee representative agreed to.
review the administration of followup and correction of QA
audit deficiencies with the objective of increasing the
efficiency of the system. This is an open item (285-254).
c.
Operational Mini-Audits
The operational mini-audits, as described in QAP-14, are being
perfomed as specified and the results are well documented; but
it appears that the responses and followup on deficiencies are
not always adequate or timely. The means of recording responses
varied from letters to vague notes penciled in the margin of the
audit report. Many items appear to be overdue for resolution as
illustrated by the following:
3/25/75
Rusted Component Cooling Lines to CECM's
12/21/77 Containment Integrity & Containment Heating Cooling /
-
Ventilation Labeling
12/22/77 Containment Heating Cooling / Ventilation Labeling
11/2/77
Welded 2" Nipple to AC-10C Outlet
4/3/78
Quench Tank Pressure
5/22/78
PRC-M0 Procedure Review / Retention
Section 3.5.3 of QAP 14 requires that a list of outstanding QA
Form No. 4's (mini-audit deficiency reports) be attached to the
monthly Mini-Audit Sumary Report. The Mini-Audit Sumary
Reports for the months February-June 1978 do-not contain
complete lists of all of the appropriate outstanding mini-audit
deficiencies for the month of the report. As an example, the
June 1978 sumary dated July 6,1978, had no outstanding
.
.
. . . . _ _
.
_
-5-
deficiencies listed. The licensee's failure to list all out-
standing QA Form 4's in the monthly Mini-Audit Sumary Reports
for February through June 1978 as required by QAP-14 is an
apparent item of noncompliance with Criterion V of Appendix B
to 10 CFR 50 as amplified by Section 17.5 of the licensee's NP.C
approved QA program.
4.
Preparation for Refueling
The inspector reviewed the receipt inspection packages for the new
fuel shipments received on August 18 and 23,1978. Fuel transfer
and core reconstitution and verification procedures were not yet
completed by the licensee. These will be reviewed during a future
inspection. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Review of Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
Certain LER's were reviewed to ascertain that reporting requirements
were met, that appropriate corrective action was taken, that licensee
-
procedures were followed in the review and evaluation of the event,
and to determine the safety of continued operations. The LER's listed
below were reviewed upon receipt in the Regional Office and followed up
on site during this inspection.
LER Number
Subject
,
78-17
Diesel Generator
78-22
Diesel Generator
78-24
Diesel Generator
Three reports were reviewed in the Regional Office and no on-site follow
up was conducted. These were numbered 78-13, 78-15 and 78-21. No items
of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Follow Up on Open Items
(Closed)OpenItem 285/209 (paragraph 6.a Inspection Report 77-01):
Battery room ventilation
Amendment No. 40 to Facility Operating
-
License No. DPR-40 for Fort Calhoun Station includes a requirement that
the battery rooms be equipped with air flow monitors and that the
exhaust ducts be modified to prevent the accumulation of hydrogen at
the ceiling. These modifications are to be implemented by December 1978.
(0 pen) Open Item 285/217 (paragraph 5.b, Inspection Report 77-02):
Containment Spray System nozzle testing
Licensee memorandum
-
TS-FC-78-356 was reviewed during this inspection. The inspector will
review the engineering evaluations and calculations which formed the
basis for this memorandum during a future inspection.
,
. . .
--
-_
_
-___
.
.
-
-6-
(Closed)OpenItem 285/231 (paragraph 4, Inspection Report 77-13):
Revision of SP-flFR-1 and flMA-1
Procedure Change flo. 3470 removes
-
the checklists from SP-flFR-1 and refers to those in f1MA-1.
(Closed) Open Item 285/241 (paragraph 3.b, Inspection Report 77-21):
Development of specific fire fighting procedures
Amendment flo. 40
-
to facility Operating License fio. DPR-40 for Fort Calhoun Station
includes a requirement that the licensee develop procedures and the
strategies to fight fires in all safety-related areas and areas present-
ing a hazard to safety-related equipment. The completion date for this
item is listed as June 1979.
(0 pen)OpenItem 285/244 (paragraph 6.c, Inspection Report 78-02): Lack
of an administrative system to assure proper and timely revision of
plant procedures in response to Technical Specification and Design
Changes
The licensee has made no apparent progress on this item.
-
(Closed)OpenItem 285/246 (paragraph 6, Inspection Report 78-04):
Revision of OI-ES-1-CL-A to include new channels added by DCR 74A-127
-
Procedure Change 3307 adds the new level channels for the Safety
Injection tanks to the checklist.
7.
Follow Up on Items of Nonccmpliance
(0 pen) floncompliance (Infraction 1.b, Inspection 77-10): Failure to file
completed design change records in the site records vault
The step
-
to prevent further noncompliance which is still incomplete involves the
revision of QAP-7 and 50 C-2 to resolve conflicts between the two
documents with respect to which records are to be stored in the QA
records vault. Revision 1 of QAP 7 was issued on August 7,1978. A
licensee representative stated that the revision of 50 C-2 would be
completed by Septaber 30,1978.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (Infraction 1
Inspection 78-04): Failure to
perfom and document liquid penetrant examination of welds perfomed
under DCR 77-84, SRDC0 77-23
One of the corrective steps to avoid
-
further noncompliance involved reminding Quality Assurance and Quality
Control personnel of the necessity for proper documentation of procedure
changes as outlined by Standing Order G-30.
Licensee representatives
were only able to locate training records indicating that one QC person
had received training recently in procedure change methods. The required
training for the other QA and QC personnel has not yet been perfomed
and/or documented. The inspector will review this item during a future
inspcction.
(Closed) floncompliance (Deficiency 1, Inspection 78-06): Failure to
report failure of VA-80A and VA-808
The inspector discussed the
-
licensee's response to this item with a licensee representative and had
no further questions.
._- -_ _ _ __-___-____ _ ___--__
,
.
.
,
-7-
(0 pen) Noncompliance (Deficiency 2, Inspection 78-06): Failure to
use required sample size for trisodium phosphate dodecahydrate test
ing
Corrective steps to avoid further noncompliance included
-
weighing sample baskets in advance and tagging them with gross and tare
weights. A licensee representative indicated f. hat the above steps
would be included in ST-CHEM-2-F-3, but this pr ocedure had not yet
been revised.
(Closed) Noncompliance (Infraction 3, Inspec+!6n 78-06): Failure to
maintain the required water inventory in the e:ergency feedwater
storage tank
Corrective action for this item included revising
-
the Surveillance Log (FC-71) to require recording tank level each
shift and revising 01-RC-3 to add a step and a precaution to insure
'
that tank level is adequate prior to heating the RCS above 3000F.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (Infraction 4, Inspection 78-06):
Failure to
log required parameters on Control Room Log Sheet when the plant per-
>
formance ccmputer log typewriter was inoperable
One of the
-
corrective steps to avoid further noncompliance involved the revision
of Standing Order 0-24. This revision had not yet been performed.
[
,
8.
Plant Conditions Observed'Ouring a Plant Tour
Upon arrival at the site during a weekend backshift, the inspector
,
observed control room operations, manning and indications; and toured
!
accessible areas of the auxiliary building outside the radiation
'
controlled area. No items of noncompliance or deviations were
identified.
9.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required
'
in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable itens, items of
noncompliance, or deviations. An unresolved item, disclosed during
the inspection, is discussed in paragraph 3.b.
10.
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph
l
1) on September 20, 1978. At this meeting, the inspectors summarized
the scope and findings of the inspection,
j
Subsequent to the inspection, the inspector contacted a licensee
representative by telephone to inform him that the terms " annual" or
i
" yearly" are interpreted by Region IV to mean each twelve months plus
.
!
or minus two months.
,
8
6
$
1
. - - - - - . . , , . . , . ,
,
__m
, . .
_ - - . -
- , , _ . .
- - - -