IR 05000269/1978009
| ML19316A180 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1978 |
| From: | Jape F, Robert Lewis NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19316A176 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-78-09, 50-269-78-9, 50-270-78-09, 50-270-78-9, 50-287-78-09, NUDOCS 7911280716 | |
| Download: ML19316A180 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:__, _ _ _~. .. - - - + - - - - - - - < - ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ " ~ ' ^ ~ * ' ~ ~ ~ ' ^ ^ " ^ - . . , . g4 Kf 4, UNITED STATES o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, y g39,([gg REGloN il
- .
/ - (W '. g 230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 .- [ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o l gv j j
- ..,*
i f Report Nos.: 50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 and 50-287/78-9 Docket Nos.: 50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 License Nos.: DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 Licensee: Duke Power Company Box 2178 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 ' , ?acility Name: Oconee 1, 2 and 3 Inspection at: Oconee Nuclear Station Inspection conducted: April 18 and April 25-27, 1978 Inspector: F. Jape Accompanying Personnel: P. H. Johnson, Region V Reviewed by: + 0.
8[M70 R. C. Lewis, Chief Date Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclect Support Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on April 18 and April 25-27, 1978: (Report Nos.
50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 and 50-287/78-9) Areas Inspected: Special, unannounced inspection on April 18 to verify implementation of procedure changes related to the reactor coolant system small break analysis, and routine, unannounced inspection on April 25-27 to review plant operations, licensee event reports, and followup on an unresolved item and an IEB.
The inspection involved 15 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the inspection.
l i 39112Sh --
,_ - __ ... . _. ~.. _.. -_ _.- _ __ _.-..-.___ _ _ _m _ _ - . ( RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 and 50-287/78-9 I-l t DETAILS I Prepared by: F. Jape, Reactor I6dpect5r 'Dat'e Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Dates of Inspection: April 18 and April 25-27, 1978 , Reviewed by: [[. LM 7/M/[ R. C. Lewi's, Chief 'Date Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch 1.
Persons Contacted )
- J. E. Smith, Station Manager (April 18)
- R. M. Koehler, Superintendent of Technical Services H. R. Lowery, Operating Engineer
W. M. McClain, Procedures Engineer j ' P. J. Los "--*rol Operator H. W. Mr ..ift Supervisor L. C. Es.,, Assistant Shift Supervisor D. L. Gordan, Assistant Shift Supervisor
- R. T. Bond, Technical Services Engineer R. P. Todd, Assistant Test Engineer
- W. M. Harris, Operating Engineer
- R. J. Brackett, Station Senior QA Engineer
- Denotes attendance at management exit meeting.
j 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item 77-24-06: The liquid waste disposal monitor was replaced and tested.
The system was declared operational in January 1978 and has functioned satisfactorily to date.
Further review of the process monitoring system is being pursued through followup of unresolved item 73/12-1.
3.
Unresolved Items No new unresolved items were identified during this inspection.
. !
_
l
_. _ --..- - - - - . . ....- . .. -.. -
1 I ! RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 I and 50-287/78-9 I-2 ! 4.
Management Exit Meeting At the conclusion of the special inspection on April 18 the inspector met with J. E. Smith, Station Manager and discussed the procedural changes described in the April 14, 1978, letter to NRR from DPC.
The inspector verified that these procedure changes had been completed.
(paragraph 5) Cc April 27 the inspector met with R. M. Koehler, Acting Station Manager, and those denoted in paragraph 1, to discuss the inspection findings for the period April 25-27.
The findings were acknowledged by licensee manaEement without significant comment.
The procedural changes verified on April 18, were reexamined using the April 21, 1978, letter from DPC to NRC.
The inspector verified that the changes have been implemented consistent with the licensee's commitment to NRR. (paragraph 5) 5.
Reactor Coolant System Small Break Analysis The Region II NRC office was informed on April 12, 1978, that Babcock and Wilcox's ECCS analysis for Oconee Units 1 2 ano 2 had not included consideration of the worst cgre small break locatica.
- Specifically, B&W reported that a 0.04 ft break in '.he reactor coolant pump discharge line with only one high pressure injection (HPI) train available, could lead to a situation tha ; would not be in full compliance with the provis20ns of 10 CFR 50.:6.
The licensee reviewed this concern with the Office of Inspection and Enforcement and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Procedure changes were identified in a letter fRes DPC to NRR dated A;;il 14, 1978, which were being implemented as interim measures until the small break analysis could be completed. During a site virit on April 18, 1978, the inspector verified that the licensee had r eplemented the procedure changes described in the April 14 letter, and that operating personnel were familiar with the revised procedures.
On April 19, 1978, the licensee notified Region II ARC office that the ongoing safety analysis by B&W for a small brea t in the reactor coolant system identified a further change in the -ize of the worst case break. The reanalysis indicated results more severe than those addressed in the April 14 letter.
To insure comp 12suce with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.46, procedure changes and operator actions were described in a letter from DPC to NRR dated April 21, 1978.
The inspector verified that the procedure changes have been implemented and that operating personnel were familiar with the revisions.
- @
.. _-. _ - - . -. - - - - - -.- . . _ _ _.... __ z - .. _ ._ - - - - - -- - - - - ,
- . I
i RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 and 50-287/78-9 I-3 j
. I f i ! The licensee has one operator per shift assigned as the " valve operator." This operator has the responsibility to perform the l necessary valving to provide the second HPI flow path should the need arise. He has on his person the keys necessary to obtain ' access to the valve locations.
i i The inspector witnessed a demonstration run by the valve operator, i from the Unit 1-2 control room to the valve locations.
The run to the HPI pump location required 2 1/2 minutes, excluding the time , necessary to dress for entry to the radiation zone.
During an actual situation the operator has instructions and permission to go ,
j directly to the valve location without taking time to dress as
stated in the radiation work permit. The run from the Unit 1-2 i control room to the penetration room, where HP-26 is located, ! required one minute.
The demonstration runs were accomplished by J the operator in a fast walk rather than actually running.
The run
requires exit and entry through locked doors.
The inspector was informed, by licensee management, that upon failure of the lock
i system, the doors fail open.
Hence, the operator should not be impeded due to computer malfunction.
The procedure changes verified by the inspector are as follows: ", EP/1800/04, Loss of RC: Case B, Small Leak on RC Pu=p Discharge Piping, added to the procedure.
OP/1102/01, Controlling Pr6cedure For Unit Start-Up: HPI valve , lineup changed to require HP-25 to be closed.
OP/1104/02, HP Injection System Operating Procedure: Valve lineup
checklist changed to close HP-25, and open HP-ll7, HP-99 and HP-100.
i PT/202/11, HP Injection System Performance Test: Valve lineup changed to be consistent with OP/1102/01 and OP/1104/02.
PT/150/15A, RB Isolation Valve Exercise Functional Test: Valve lineup and test requirements changed to be consistent OP/1102/01 ' and OP/1104/04.
PT/600/1, Periodic Instrument Surveillance: Enclosure 13.8 was added to provide instructions for the valve operator, and to document ' the valve operator assignment.
i
- Y - ,
. -
- .- -
JL_- .____ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ...___ .- ' . . e , o(~N { RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-9, 50-270/78-9 ' and 50-287/78-9 I-4 t 6.
IEB 78-04 Followup on licensee's actions related to IEB 78-04, " Environmental Qualifications of Certain Stem Mounted Limit Switches Inside Reactor Containment," was completed.
The licensee's response, dated March 23, 1978, stated that this bulletin is not applicable to Oconee since there are no NAMCO D2400X or EA-170-302 SNAP LOCK, switches in safety-related applications inside containment.
No forther action is planned for this item.
7.
Review of Licensee Event Reports The inspector performed an in-office review of the nonroutine event reports listed below.
The report details met licenso requirements, identified the cause of the event, described corrective actions appropriate for the identified cause, adequately assessed actions appropriate for the identified cause and adequately assessed the event and any generic implications.
Personnel were interviewed to verify that the reports accurately reflected the circumstances of the event, that the corrective action had been taken or responsibility " assigned to assure completion and that the event was reviewed by the licensee as stipulated in the Technical Specifications.
The following event reports were reviewed: R0-264/78-8 R0-270/78-3 R0-287/78-8 8.
Plant Operations The inspector reviewed plant operations to ascertain conformance with regulatory requirements and technical specifications.
Interviews with plant operations personnel and observations by the inspector revealed no discrepancies.
During the observation period, Unit 1 was in a cold. shutdown status, Unit 2 was in a power ascension status and Unit. 3 was at full power operation.
, o e }}