IR 05000269/1975009
| ML19329A461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 08/27/1975 |
| From: | Epps T, Long F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19329A460 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-75-09, 50-269-75-9, 50-270-75-10, 50-287-75-10, NUDOCS 8001031028 | |
| Download: ML19329A461 (8) | |
Text
.I
"
,
.
L UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION flECloN'll
\\.
r
[
,
c 230 PE AcHTH Ec STR EET. N. W.
SulTE St t g
AT L ANT A. G EORCI A 30303 H.
-
-
.
.
IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-10 and 50-287/75-10
,
Licensee:
Duke Power Co:apany Power Building 422 South Church Street
- .
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201
I l
Facility Name: Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3
-
-
Docket Nos.:
50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 j
License Nos.:
DPR-38, 47 and 55 s
Category:
C, C and B2 i
l Location:
Seneca, South Carolina
'
l
-
Type of License:
i Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced Dates of Inspection: July 29-31, 1975
!
Dates of Previous Inspection: May 27-30 and June 3-6, 1975 Principal Inspector:
j
/v 8-17'7.f
. ',
T.N.Epps,Reacfo[ Inspector -'
Date f
j Facilities Operations Branch
.,..-~..._n__,.,
,
.____
Accompanying Inspectors:
None *
._
..
g Reviewed by
- '., w % __
2,./5
'
F. J. Long, Chief G
' Dste Facilities Operations Branch l
- See Details II
.
j
-
.
!
'
j,r /* +4
-
g a%pvw
.
g M(f E
- 7/6 198
.
..._._ __ _.. _.3 3,188 2 OQ
- - ~ ~
-- -
. _ _ _ _
..._. _
_
- - -.
.
---
.
..
.
.-..
.-.-.
.. - - -.
-
,.
,
IE Rpt. Nra. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-10
and 50-287/75-10-2-
-
,
n,
.
.
'
'
~~
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS I.
Enforcement 'Ite'ms
,'
Fi?
A.
Deficiencies 1.
Contrary to Technical Specification 6.6.2.1.a, abnormal occurrence report A0-287/75-7 did not include an analysis and evaluation of the safety implications involved in the blowdown of the Unit-3 reactor coolant system nor did the report address the causes and corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence of the incident.
(Details I, Paragraph 2)
(Unit 3)
/
!
II.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Matters
+
Not inspected.
III. New Unresolved Items None
-
i I
IV.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items '
__
i Oconee 1, 2 and 3 (50-269, 50-270 and 50-287)
74-10, 08, 11/7 NSRC Review Cacability This item is closed.
(Details I, Paragraph d,.
75-3/1 Analysis of Liquid Waste Samples This item is closed.
(Details II, Paragraph 2)
,
74-7/2 Activity in the Comoonent Cooling System This item is closed.
(Details I, Paragraph 7)
V.
Other Significant Findings None
,
VI. Management Interview A management interview was held on July 31, 1975, with Mr. J. E. S:ith and members of his staff.
Items discussed included the noncompliance item in Section I of the summary of this report, surveillance 'cesting, two unresolved items in this summary and settlement of Class I structures.
Further discussions were held with licensee corporate management on
' August 5 -1975, concerning additional information on the Unit 3 blow-down that occurred on June 13, 1975.
_
_
_. - - - - -
...
--
-.
--
.
_
_ _,..
-
.-
. _ _... _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ _.. _ __
_
_
_
_
.
.
.
,
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
b IE Rpt. Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-10'
I-l
~
and 50-287/75-10
-
.
- 6
'
'
.
K
[~2 / ~7[
l- ~"
DETAILS I Prepared by:
Date T.N.Epps,Reacpr/ Inspector Facilities Opera,ti6ns Branch Dates of Inspection:
July.29-31, 1975
'~
Reviewed by wt
.
<
F. J. Long, Chief ( pate Facilities Operations Branch
/
.
1.
Individuals Contacted Duke Power Company (DPC)
J. E. Smith - Manager, Oconee Nuclear Statien J. W. Hampton - Director, Administrative Services
.
L. E. Schmid - Operating Superintendent O. S. Bradham - lbintenance Superintendent R. M. Koehler - Technical Services Superintendent
_.s T. S. Barr - Technical Services Engineer R. P. Bugert - Training Supervisor 2.
Unit 3 RCS Blowdown Oconee Technical Specification 6.6.2.1.a requires that written abnormal occurrence reports describe, analyse and evaluate safety inplications and vttline the corrective actions and measures taken -
olanned to prevent recurrence.
Contrary to the above the licensee's abnormal occurrence report (AO-287/75-7) did not fully describe, analyze and evaluate safety implications and outline all corrective actions.
The licensee's report primarily addressed the excessive coo N own rate of 101 F in one hour rather'than addressing the entire reactor coolant syster 'olowdown and the saf.ety implications of the incident.
- Apparently the initial transient was caused by a transfer of the turbine into manual while the unit load demand (ULD) was at 65 MWe and reactor power (automatically controlled) at 115 MWe. This eventually caused levels in the once through steam generators no swin:;
causing RCS temperature, pressure and power swings.
RCS pressure
~ -
--
.__
_ _
__
._
__
_.. _. _. _., _ _ _
. _ _ _ _
-
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
'
- )
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-l'0 I-2
!
'
and 50-287/75-10
-
-.
sit
-
'
spiked to 2267 psi which caused the power actuated relief valve, on the pressurizer, to open.
The valve malfunctioned and remained in the open position.
In addition a solenoid operated plunger that actuates position indication lights in the control room for the pressurizer relief valve calfunctioned.
,
As a result of this incident reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure decrea.ed from 2250 psi to 720 psi within 26 minutes.
The reactor tripp2d at 18G0 psi and high pressure injection (HPI) initiated at 1500 psi.
/
The transient was terminated when a block valve was closed isolating
,
the opened relief valve.
{
During this transient the rupture disc in the quench tank ruptured due to steam from the relief valve building up pressure in the quench tank. Approximately 1500 gallons of prinary water were lost
,
l through the quench tank to the containment.
Insulation 'on the bottom
'
of the pressurizer was damaged when the rupture disc blew.
i The licensee's report did not address the initial cause of the i
!
transient and corrective action to prevent recurrence; why the block valve that isolates the pressurizer relief valve was not closed
'
sooner; corrective action to prevent recurrence on all 3 Oconee Units of the problems with the pressurizer relief valve and position indication equipment; possible damage to the pressurizer; or activity released.
The inspector stated to Oconee site personnel and later to Duke Power Co=pany corporated personnel that whenever rapid uncontrolled
'
depressurizatics of the primary system occurs causing HPI initiation and loss of soce primary coolant, abnormal degradation of the primary coolant boundary has occurred even if blowdown is through an isolable fault if the fault is not isolated.
,
The licensee agreed to submit supplemental information on this subject.
l 3.
Surveillance
!
!
The inspector reviewed several surve'.llance testing procedures
,
l and results including the folicwing subject areas.
l RCS Chemistry
-
!
RCS Leakage Control Rod Movement
.
.
,
e b
._c..-_,;._
___
. _ _ _
.
-.,
. _.. _ _ _
.-
.
,
'
.
.
.
LE Rpt. Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50- 230/71-10,
I-3.
/?
and 50-287/75-10.
.
3-
-
t
'.
p..
Emergency Feedwater Pump Testing Secondary Coolant Activity Spent Fuel Pool Water Samples
.
Electrical Systems HPI and LPI Pumps
Some Reactor Building Local Leak Tests Within the scope of this review no noncompliance items were identified.
4.
Operator Ra46alification Pregram A licensee representative stated that NRC licensing personnel reviewed some operator requalification examinations that were given at Oconee.
The requalification program received final approval June 18, 1975.
.
5.
settle =ent of Class I Structures The inspector inquired as to whether the licensee has a program for measuring differential settlement of class I structures, such as, the reactor building and auxiliary building.
The licensee stated that such a program does not exist at Oconee since the facility is built on solid rock.
6.
NSRC Review Capability
.
__.__._ _
member of the NSRC.has_an, formation to the effect that one permanent The licensee furnished in X.Sr' degree in Materials Engineering and provides capability for reviewing metalurgical considerations.
- -
This item is closed.
,
Activity in the Component Cooling System
.
\\
The licensee's letter to the NRC's Region II office dated
'
May 9, 1975, stated that a modification had been installed which added additional isolation valves between the component cooling drain tank pump discharge header and the miscellaneous vaste transfer pump discharge header.
The level of activity in the component cooling system has decreased. The licensee stated in the letter that monitoring of component cooling system activity will continue until the activity decays to normal background.
This item is closed.
.
e
.
'
,-
.
t
-
-
-.
-
-
m
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
'
()
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-10 I4
' '
and 50-287/75-10
~
'
Fi?
'
.'
-
8.
Bingham Pu=p Bolts The inspector questioned licensee personnel about testing done on Bingham Pump hold-down bolts.
A licensee representative stated that during ISI baseline testing these bolts were UT tested and found to be acceptable.
Samples of these bolts will be retested at regular intervals such that all will be tested in the 10 year ISI cycle.
-
JV
.
e e
O G
k
O e
e e
I i
..
l
.
I
,
-
-
iE Rp't. N:s. 50-269/75-S, 50-270/75-10 and 50-287/75-10 11-1
.
.
pp DETAILS II Prepared by:
N
[
~2
'
-
-
-
W. L. Britz, Radiatfon Specialist Date Environmental Protection, Materials
.
- RadiolbElcal Protection, and Special Projects Section Radiological and Environmental
. Protection Branch
- Date of Inspection:
July 22, 1975
,
Reviewed by: [ 2.
en[
f/./ 2 /7f a
R. L. Bangartj Senior Health Physicist 'Date Environmental Protection, Materials Radiological Protection, and JI Special Projects Section
!
Radiological and Environmental
,
i Protection Branch i
1.
Individuals Contacted J. W. Hampton, Director, Administrative Services (Acting Plant Manager)
i D. L. Davison, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor
.
2.
Analysis of Licuid Waste Sampics (75-3/1)
A.
The licensee.is required to measure quantities and concentrations of radioactive material in effluents from his facility.
During i
previous independent measurement checks of June, Septe=ber, and
!
October,1974, the licensee's ability to measure radioactivity
!
in test standards and plant effluent split samples was evaluated.
Some results of the licensee's measurements of gamma emitters and strontium in liquid were in disagreement.
It was also determined that gross beta analyses had not been normalized against results of total isotopic analyses when used to determine values for
,
reporting releases of liquid effluents.
See IE Report Nos.
-
50-269/75-3, 50-270/75-3, and 50-287/75-3.
'
B.
On March 18, 1975, liquid and gas split samples were collected by
,
the Division of Radiological Health, State of South Carolina and analyzed by the licensee's laboratory and the NRC's ref erence i
laboratory. There were eighteen measurement comparisons. Twelve comparisons were in agreement, four were in possible agreement,
,
l and two in disagreement.
The disagreements were on antimony-124
in the liquid sample and krypton-85 in the gas sample which were not detected by the licensee, but were reported present in concen-trations greater than 10% of 10 CFR 20 Appendix B, Table II, by
,
the NRC's reference laboratory.
It appears thats.these two isotopes were not detected due to the short counting times used.
The licensee has committed to coun't future split samples for about one hour to achieve icwcr sensitivities.
The gn=ma emitting measurements are now resolved.
m
- The inspection action was an in-of fice evaluation of analytical results, which were discussed by telephone with the licensce' representative on July 22, 1975.
-
, -
_.-
_
_
_
- -.
. -
_
.
'
.._. _..
....
~. _.
_ _... _. _ _.. _ _ _ _..
_
.._s.___..._..._
- *
.
l.
-
.
,
,
..
'
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-269/75-9, 50-270/75-10
/N and 50-287/75-10 II-2
.
\\.)
,
- 4
'
-
>
'
C.
On April 3, 1975, strontium test standards in a liquid sample and on a particulate filter were sent to the licensee's labora-tory for analysis to resolve the disagreements of June and Septecher, 1974. The licensee's laboratory procedures were also reviewed by the NRC's reference laboratory.
Comments provided to the licensee's laboratory by the NRC's laboratory
~~
included: use of Sr-85, Ba-133, and Y-88 as ga=ma tracers to l
check various steps in the procedure for removal or yield factorr;, more exact control of pH, filtering rather than
-
centrifuging in one step, and controlling temperature in anothat step.
The results of four measurement comparisons for Sr-89 and 90 were three agreements and one possible agreenent. The previous strontium measurements on the March 18 liquid analysis were also in agreement. The strontie=
measurements are now resolved.
The. licensee in a letter of April 11, 1975, reported he has l
L.
l now determined and is using a normalization factor.on the gross beta analysis, based on total isotopic analysis, when making radioactive liquid releases based on the gross beta analysis. This item is now resolved.
.
S
"
?
.
.
.
j i
..
.
.
.