IR 05000344/1987005

Insp Rept 50-344/87-05 on 870223-27.No Noncompliance or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Procedures, Surveillance,Testing & Calibr Program Operational Safety Verification & Followup of Info Notices & Bulletins

ML20204H829
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	03/09/1987
From:	Mendonca M, Pereira D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20204H780	List: IR 05000344/1987005 ML20204H774
References
50-344-87-05, 50-344-87-5, IEB-84-03, IEB-84-3, IEB-86-003, IEB-86-3, NUDOCS 8703270112
Download: ML20204H829 (7)

Text

-

[ciip,y y;r .

', ,

y .

,

_ . - ,a 3;. e ', . f.. : ;f Q

- - - '

~

.

, Mfy z ,. -

af , &- 4 -

,

g: . ., '

~

"-

'

. UI S'. . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION

,

'

m' '

, .

,-

7- - ' -

-

. REGIO .pl

. ,

.

.

E'

g' l t

,

p , '

.p

'

L. M , ' 4 Report;No: '50-344/87-05'

-

-

_

- -

g;2

~

-

Docket'N' r 7^

. .o

.Lihense'No~.NPF-1

'

'; Licensee: ; Portland General Electric Company

-

~

, .

- -

J121 S. W. Salmon Street

.~ .

-

. Portland, Oregon -97204 2

~

q Facility Name: fTrojan Nuclear, Plan v Inspection.-ati Ra' infer,;0regon

}

~ Inspection'cond ct d: February 23-27, 1987'

n _. ( M~ ,

,

7 4 - ' . B. Pereira,. Reactor Inspector Date Signed =

'

',[Npprov$dby: . --

FM 7 M. M. Mendonca, Chief, Date Signed

'

e - 3 "

f: ,- , . Reactor-Proje~ct Section 1 ,

iSummary:

'

.

,

.

'

'

s fInspectio'n During the Period of' February 23-27, 1987'(Report'50-344/87-05)

Areas Inspected: Thi's routine, unannounced inspection by the Project Inspector. involved the areas of Procedures,' Surveillance Testing and

< Calibration Program, Operational Safety Verification, and Fo??owup of l , ^Information Notices , Bulletins'and open items. During this inspection, F-

'

inspection modules 30703, 4270.0, 61725, 71707, 92701, 92703, and 30702 were .

7 ,

'use D Results: No items'of noncompliance or deviations were identifie .

,

is ,

'

,

.

.7

s e

in?

..gq 1 i<,

-

.

['

f B703270112 870309 f hDR ADOCK 05000344 . PDR

'F.-

.

b 2

- .

.. -. . ._. . -. . . . -

,

c'

, .-

.

- .

,

J q _

' DETAILS

.

-

, Persons Contacted

~LicenseelPersonnel

"

• C. A. Olmstead, General Manager

-

• R. Jarman, Manager, Quality Assurance Department

"*D. Keuter, Manager, Technical Services

• J.:D. Reid, Manager, Plant Services

• C..H. Brown, Operations Branch Manager, Quality Assurance

• B. Kershul Engineer, Nuclear Safety and Regulation Department D. L. Bennett,. Supervisor, Control and Electrical

,

R. Reinart, Supervisor, Instrument and Control D. W. Swan, Supervisor,' Maintenance

• R. Russell, Assistance Operations Supervisor, Quality Assurance I l0'regonDepartmento"fEnergy H. Moomey, Oregon Resident' Inspector

• Attended.the' Exit Meeting on February 28, 1987.

, PlantPro'ceduresirEgram Thepurpose,ofthis_ihspectionwas-todeterminewhetheroverail plant procedures,' temporary procedures and procedure' changes were

'

in accordance with regulatory requirements. Technical Specifications, and licensee commitments. The inspection

~ included a review of the following procedures:

-

(1) General Plant Operating Procedures-8

'

(2) Startup, Operation, and Shutdown of Safety-Related System Procedures-14 (3) Abnormal.(Alarm) Condition Procedures-8 (4) Procedures for Emergencies and Other Significant Events-8 (5) Maintenance Procedures-6 (6) Administrative Procedures-4 The inspection included a review of checklists and related forms

-

in~the Control Room and assured that these documents were maintained current with respect to revisions. The inspector verified-that the

'

Control Room, and the Technical Support Center (TSC) procedures were maintained in accordance with the master revision lis The results of this inspection were as follows:

1 The inspector reviewed procedural changes and verified that the

,

revised procedures were in conformance with Technical

- Specifications and License revisions. These changes were in i

,

a

- , _ . . . . . _ _ .. . _ . ., _ ... _ . ___.~..- _ _ _ ___,,_ _._._._,.___--- _ _ _,

r .

- -

,

-

1 g .

le >

conformance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements and were being maintained, The inspector examined the above' identified procedures to verify-that overall procedure content were consistent with the technical specification requirements. The technical. content of some of the-procedures were reviewed to verify adequate control of safety-related operations within the technical specification requirement The inspector verified that procedures were in effect for assuring that safety-related systems / components which could be exposed to a freezing environment remain functional following such exposur ~ The inspector reviewed procedures in the Control Room and the TSC and verified that the procedures were current with respect to revisions and temporary changes. This review of Control Room and TSC operating, emergency, administrative procedures, and temporary changes indicated that they were checked or audited each mont No violations or deviations were identifie , Surveillance Testing and Calibration Control Program

~

The purpose of this inspection was to determine whether the licensee has programs for control and evaluation of surveillance testing,-

calibration, and calibration of safety-related instrumentation not specifically controlled by Technical Specification The inspector verified that master schedules are established for surveillance testing / calibration / inservice inspection and testin Each maintenance group responsible for surveillance testing or calibration maintained their own schedule. This schedule specified the frequency for each test / calibration / inspection, detailed the personnel responsible for performing the test / calibration / inspection, and presented the surveillance test statu The inspector verified that responsibility had been assigned in writing to maintain the surveillance test / calibration schedule up to date. Administrative Order (A0)-6-1, entitled " Periodic Surveillance" established the responsibilities for the periodic surveillance /

calibration / inspection schedules and established the particular supervisor for each group as responsible for maintaining their schedule up to date. In addition, the responsible supervisor ensured that the required frequency of surveillance / calibration / inspection was satisfie The inspector examined surveillance tests, calibration procedures, and inspections to determine that they were conducted in accordance with approved procedures with acceptance criteria. A0-6-1 provides guidelines for the performance of all periodic tests, periodic calibrations, inspections, and maintenance procedures and establishes

.

L

m n A4~.

-

~~

l. t $ -

3=

^

_4 b 1 formal meth'ods and responsibilities for review and evaluation by the

'

i responsible supervisor of' surveillance test / calibration data. A0-6-3,

" entitled " Anomalous Indication During Periodic Surveillance" provided for reporting deficiencies, failures, and malfunctions identified

,

-during the tests / calibrations or inspection % During the inspector's review of the surveillance and calibration ,

~

,

w~ control program, a. Nonconforming Activity Report (NCAR) was reviewed t which indicated that the licensee's mechanism to update the master schedule to . reflect Technical Specfication or license revisions was e

not as comprehensive or as clear as should have been. NCAR-P87-025,~

dated February 13, 1987, reporte'd that license changes were not

,

adequately controlled to ensure that the: changes were incorporated E,

.

into the Plant 0perating Manual. During the research for a--Tec Spec. audit, the licensee Quality Assurance-staff found that a new surveillance requirement'had _not yet been implemented by the: plant

"

procedure, P0T-24-1, on February 2, 1987. The new requirement was dated December 16, 1986. The licensee's Nuclear Division Procedure

,

(NDP) No. 700-2 (Steps 5.2.E and F) provides guidance on distribution and implementation of license changes. Quality Assurance staff discussions with Operations, and-Plant Engineering,personne1' indicated

~

that this guidance is inadequate. The inspector concluded that this

,

NCAR identified a potential generic problem and would be followed as

,, an open item (87-05-01).

c _

-No violations or deviations were identifie . Follow-up on Previous Inspection Finding * (Closed) Inspection Report Followup 86-47-01-Maintenance Procedure 1-14-125 Volt Station Batteries Annual Maintenance s Approval Signature and Date Missing

,

' Inspection Report 86-47 examined MP-1-14 data for the annual maintenance of one of the 125 Volt Batteries and discovered that

[' several data sheets did not have the approval signatures and date as required. The inspector informed the maintenance manager of the missing signatures and dates. During this inspection period,

'

the _ inspector re examined MP-1-14 dat The missing signatures

'

and dates were correctly and accurately inserted by the applicable supervisor. No further missing entries were discovered in this data review. Followup item 86-47-01 is closed.

! (Closed) Inspection Report Followup 85-33-03 Revision of Procedure MP-1-14 is needed to account for water addition to the station batterie .

'

Inspection report 85-33-03 examined MP-1-14 data tables and ( discovered that water addition was not being recorded in the tables when water was added to the station batteries. The licensee revised MP-1-14 with Revision 14 which provides for recording of any water addition in Data Sheet D. The inspector verified Revision 14 is approved and that water addition is being

, recorded when necessary. This item is close t s

['

' ' ^ ^ ^ ^ ' ' ' ' '

E[# y .. [

,.---

- -

-

.;.' .

~"c .

4'

y

'

'

' ,

'

, y,  ; - ,

'_

-

,

'

t s .- , s ,

^

,

y dClosed) IE Bulletin' No. 86103 Potential Failure of Multiple _

.

> '

ECCS Pum?s Due to Single Failure of Air-Operated Valve in 7- Minimum : low Recirculation Line, s

'

_

IE Bulletin No.l86-03 details a problem concerning the failure of multiple ECCS pumps due to a single failure _ of an air-operated

.

'

valve in.the pump miniflow recirculation line. Trojan replied on- .

"

November 10,-1986 that their review of Trojan's ECCS design has - .

concluded that the,BulletinLis indirectly applicable. Trojan ECCS incorporates.three sets 'of injection pumps, which are the

.

safety injection (SI) p(umps (medium head), the centrifugal-char ing=

.(RHR pumps pumps (lowhead (CCPs)).high head), and the residual heat removal I;- The miniflow ' recirculation for SI. pumps 'used at Trojan has one normally.open yalve from each of the two independent < trains in-series in.the common, discharge line to the Refueling Wate Storage. Tank (RWST). .Unlike the plants identified.in the c

Bulletin that have air-operated valves that fail in the closed

+ '

position, Trojan's valves are motor-operated and fail as is.

4 Trojan's reply.also notes that the SI miniflow recirculation-

isolation. valves are maintained in the open position with each i . control switch in the mid-position and an associated lockout ~

switch in " lockout. The lockout condition maintains the valve

! switchgear racked in, but with power to the operator removed, which provides control room indication of valve position while-at the same time preventing a signal from closing the valve.

l Trojan's CCP miniflow recirculation'also incorporates two motor- t operated isolation valvesjin series. These valves are maintained

~

in the open position with power available to their motor operators, and with-a shutoff pressure of 2670 psig, it is less

, , likely to encounter plant conditions in which deadheading.is a concern. Unlike-the SI miniflow recirculation, CCP miniflow

recirculation need not be isolated when transitioning to the 1 L ~ post-LOCA recirculation mode because it returns to either the CCP -

f suction or VCT, not the'RWS _

j The RHR pump miniflow recirculation design is different from the two previously-described systems in that the flow is returned to its respective pump suction. The miniflow systems are completely

separate for.each RHR pump and are not susceptible to the comon failure identified in.the Bulleti The inspector concluded that. Trojan's response to the prcblem of

' multiple.ECCS pump failures'upon single failure of one valve in

! the miniflow line acceptably-addressed the subject IE Bulletins

> . concerns. * IE.Bulletin 86-03 is considered closed, u (0 pen) IE Bulletin 84-03 Refueling Cavity Water Seal

-

The inspector reviewed Trojan's' status of completion of IE

, Bulletin 84-03'in regards to the modification to the Rod Control l Cluster Change Fixture Assembly. Trojan plans on completion of

,

,

re-, ---w-- , , . - -,,.m.--reg---,.i..-,,.w-se ,w,,e ..my,w -,, . -, - - - - ,- , - -

,

,, _ ~ ..

,, ,

_

"

,

,_

-

.- j v, . 5'

<

, ,

~the modification during the 1987 refueling outage which is

'

scheduled to begin on April 1, 1987. .The inspector will followup

,

on the completion at.a'later inspectio . Operational Safety Verification ,

During this inspection period, the inspector observed and examined activities to verify the operational safety of the licensee's facilit The observations and examinations of those activities were" conducted on'a daily basis.

'

'On a daily basis, the inspector observed control room activities to verify the licensee's adherence to limiting conditions for operation as prescribed in the facility Technical Specifications. Logs, instrumentation, recorder traces, and other operational records were

examined to obtain information on plant conditions, trends, and

compliance with regulations. During this week, the inspector toured the accessible areas of the facility _to' observe the following items:

( _ General plant and equipment condition , Maintenance requests and repair Fire hazards and fire fighting equipmen l Ignition' sources =and flammable material contro Conduct of activities in accordance with the licensee's administrative controls and approved procedure _ Interiors of electrical and control panel Plant housekeeping and cleanlines >

The licensee's equipment clearance control was examined daily by the inspector to determine that the licensee complied with Technical Specification limiting conditions for operation with respect to removal of equipment from service. Active clearances were spot-checked to ensure that their issuance was consistent with plant status and maintenance evolutions. Logs of jumpers, bypasses, caution, and test tags were examined by the inspecto During this week, the inspector conversed'with operators in the

~

control room, and with other' plant personnel. The discussions

'< centered on pertinent topics relating to general plant conditions,

'

procedures, security, training, and other topics aligned with the work activities involve No violations or deviations were identifie . Management Meeting The inspector attended a management meeting with the Oregon Department of Energy (000E), and the licensee on February 24, 1987 in Portlan .

T

.1

.- .. .

- .

9,.

y .. .

a* - 3 '

..

.:>- ~

. . .

n: _

_

~This meeting discussed.the ODOE' annual report on the performance of '

'A Trojan with respect'to operations, maintenance,.surveillances,

-training,-and performance indicators. Their summary of.the functional

' areas were consistent-with the NRC SALP report as previously

_

- . publishe i -- ,

9 ~ Exit' Interview q

. The-inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on February 27, 1987, and summarized the scope and

-

fin ~ dings of the inspection activitie .

+

,+

'-

.r--

%

d

, l.,

i t

<

r, s - #

ar 4 Y

.

t

,

'

i I

...

_