IR 05000155/1980015
| ML19343C183 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/25/1980 |
| From: | Boyd D, Wright G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343C180 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-80-15, NUDOCS 8102180887 | |
| Download: ML19343C183 (5) | |
Text
'
.
,,
G U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO31'!ISSION OFFIC: 9F INSPECTION AND ENFORCE!!ENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-155/80-15 Docket No. 50-155 License No. DPR-6 Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 212 West ?!ichigan Avenue Jackson, t!I 49201 Facility Name:
Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant Inspection At: Charlevoix, ?!I Inspection Conducted:
October 8 to November 7, 1980
//bI/'O Inspector:. G.
r
/
,
Approved
- D C.
h
//
Projects Section 4 Inspection Summary Inspection on October 8 to November 7, 1980 (Report No. 50-155/80-15)
Areas Inspected: Routine Resident Inspector inspection of Operational Safety, Outstanding Inspecticn Items, Review of Bulletin 80-17 and supple-ments, Review of NUREG 0578 category "A" requirements, review of commitments pertaining to " Interim Position for Containment Purge and Vent Valve Opera-tions Pending Resolution of Isolation Valve Operability," Surveillance Procedure Review, and quarterly resident inspector seminar.
The inspection involved a total of 70 inspector-hours onsite, including six hours off-shift inspection, by one h3C inspector.
Results:
In the areas inspected one item of noncompliance, deficiency; failure to follow procedure, was identified in one area.
8102180777
__ _ _.
-
_ _
_
_ __
__
_
m. --..-
i
.
l
'
DETAILS l
1.
Persons Contacted
- C. J. Hartman, Plant Superintendent
- K.
E. Marbough, Q.A. Administrator
,
- A. C. Sevener, Operations Supervisor
- D. E. DeMoor, Technical Engineer
!
- R. E. Schrader, Technical Superintendent I'
- J. J. Popa, Maintenance Engineer The inspector also contacted additional licensee personnel including; i
shift supervisors, cont.rol room operators, and I&C Technicians.
'
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
l-2.
Operational Safety Verification I
The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the month of October. The ; *.spector verified the operability of' selected
emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified proper: return
to service of affected components. Tours of the reactor building and turbine building were conducted to observe plant: equipment conditions,
including potential fire hazards,_ fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiated for equipment in need of maintenance. The inspector by observation and direct inter -
view verified that the physical security plan was being implemented in accordance with the station security plan.
'
The inspector observed plant housekeeping / cleanliness conditions and
verified implementation of radiation protection controls.. During the j
month of October, the inspector walked down the accessible portions of the core spray and post incident' core spray systems to verify
-
operability.
,
During review of the " caution tag" log the inspector noted that the
,
l semiannual review required by Administrative-Procedure A.1.4'had.last
.
.been performed on December' 11, 1979. Discussions with licensee per-
sonnel determined.that the review had not been performed _since that date.
I l
Technical Specification section 6.8.1 states in part; " Written Pro-
!
cedures shall'be established, implemented'and maintained for "all
items" defined in the Big Rock-Point Quality list".
~
The above is. considered an item of noncompliance of the deficiency level'for failure to follow procedure.
i
!
!
.
-2-
-
r
,
.
When the above situation was brought to the licensee's attention a review of the log was initiated immediately. Further, the licensee has indicated his intent to implement a surveillance procedure to insure that the review of the caution tag log are completed as required.
The inspector feels that the immediate corrective actions and proposed action to prevent re-occurrence are adequate and no written response to the item of noncompliance is required.
The surveillance procedure will be reviewd by the inspector during a future inspection.
(155/80-15-01)
3.
Monthly Surveillance Observation The inspector observed technical specifications required surveillance testing on the off gas / stack gas monitors and liquid process monitors and verified that testing 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.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort a.
Review of licensee commitments to NRR letter dated October 23, 1979 and attached " Interim Position for Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operation Pending Resolution of isolation Valve Operability."
The licensee's response of December 17, 1979 stated the following:
Item 1:
" Containment entry at Big Rock Point is required on a routine basis to monitor operation of equipment..." To support this, a partial listing of daily, bi-weekly, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annual and variable nitoring requirements was included. Thus the licensee was justifying continued venting by establishing a "need to improve working conditions to perform... safety related surveillance or safety related maintenance procedures (s)."
Item 2a: The licensee stated that analysis and testing by the valve vendor indicated that the supply valve (CV-4097) would be operable if limited to 65 open and that the exhaust valve (CV-4095) would be operable if limited to 45* open. The situation was reported in LER 50-155/79-28 which was reviewd and closed in IE Inspection Report No. 50-155/80-01.
Item 2b: The licensee indicates that modifications to-the isolation circuitry are not necessary to achieve compliance with the interim position. A review of' the schematic diagrams for the ventilation valves substantiates this position.
-3-
\\
-
.
On May 23, 1980 the licensee submitted LER 50-155/80-13 dealing with the operability of containment ventilation check valves CV-4094 and CV-4096 which are installed in series with valves CV-4095 and CV-4097, discussed above.
The LER indicated that the valves operators for CV-4094 and CV-4986 susceptable to damage during the worst case containment pressure transient and that the valve vendor recommended throttling the valves to 15 open from a normal of 45 open to assure operability.
LER 80-13 was reviewed and closed on IE Inspection Report No. 50-155/80-13.
On August 4, 1980, the licensee sent an update report on LER's 79-28 and 80-13 to the Region III office. The update to LER 79-28 stated that re-evaluation of the operability of valves CV-4095 and CV-4097 indicated that the valves would remain operable at an opening of 85* and 75 respectively. The licensee further stated that the mechanical stops on both valves had been reset from 45 open to 75 open.
The update to LER 80-13 stated that a modification to the air
'
cylinder operators of valves CV-4094 and CV-4096 had been performed.
The modification increased the site of the operators and as such allowed them to withstand the forces applied during closing during the worst case pressure transient. The modification allowed removal of the mechanical blocks set at 15 open thus allowing the valve to open to it's normal open position of 45.
On October 8, 1980, NRR issued a letter to the licensee stating that the commitments to the Interim Position were acceptable and are to remain in effect until completion of the long-term review.
The inspector has reviewed and inspected the above commitments and verified their implementation.
,
l No apparent item of noncompliance were identi'fied.
i This item is considered closed.
b.
The inspector also responded to questions pertaining to IE Information Notice 80-37 and storage of Solid Radioactive Waste at Reactors.
No apparent items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Review of Action Taken By the Licensee Pertaining to IE Bulletin 80-17
!
and Supplements A review of all items contained in IE Bulletin 80-17, and supplements 1, 2 and 3 was conducted by the inspector. Similar reviews have been-4-
-.
.
.
$
,.
,
conducted and are documented in IE Inspection Reports No. 155/80-09, 155/80-10, and 155/80-13.
No apparent items of noncompliance were identified.
This item is considered closed.
6.
Inspection of THI Task Action Plan Category "A" Requirements The inspector conducted a review of the Task Action Plan (TAP) category
"A" requirements listed below, to verify compliance with commitments.
Further information on the items is contained in IE Inspection Reports, No. 155/80-03 and 155/80-06.
TAP No. reviewed:
I.A.1.1, I.A.1.2, I.C.1, I.C.2, I.C 3, I.C.4, II.B.3, II.D.3, II.E.1.2, II.E3.1, II.E.4.2, II.F.2, II.G.1, III.A.1.2, III.D.I.1, III.D.3.3 and II.F.1.
During the review the following Open Inspection Items (OII) from IE Inspection Report No. 155/80-06 were reviewed and are considered closed, a.
OII 155/80-06-la (Closed): Review of the installation package for the steam drum safety valve position indication instrumentation.
b.
OII 155/80-06-Id (Closed): Review of the installation package for the containment isolation logic modification.
(Facility Change 487)
c.
OII 155/80-06-le (Closed): Review of the installation package for the containment air volume radiation mon-itor modification.
(Facility Change 493)
d.
OII 155/80-06-1f ) Closed): Review of the installation package for the high pnge nobel gas stack radiation monitor modification.
(Facility Change 493)
No apparent items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Resident Inspection Seminar on October 29-30, 1980 The inspector attended the Resident Inspector Seminar and supplementary training session on October 28, 1980.
8.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the individuals (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
-5-