IR 05000269/1978023

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Inspec Rept 50-269/78-23 on 780926-29 During Which No Items of Noncompliance Were Noted.Major Areas Inspected Incl:Refueling Maintenance Accomplished on safety-related Equip Incl Procedures & Plant Work Requests
ML15223A324
Person / Time
Site: Oconee Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/21/1978
From: Andrea Johnson
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML15223A320 List:
References
50-269-78-23, NUDOCS 7812060333
Download: ML15223A324 (5)


Text

SRII Rpt. No. 50-269/78-23

DETAILS I Prepared by:

_

_ _ _ _

___f A. H. Johon, Reactor I spector Date Nuclear Support Section 0. I Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Dates of Inspection:

September 26-29, 1978 Reviewed by::

_

_

R. D. Martin, Chief at Nuclear Support Section No. 1 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch 1. Persons Contacted

.

Duke Power Company (DPC)

  • J. E. Smith, Station Manager
  • R. M. Koehler, Superintendent of Technical Services
  • J. M. Davis, Maintenance Superintendent
  • R. T. Bond, Project License Engineer T. S. Barr, Performance Engineer
  • D. J. Vito, Associate Engineer/Licensing W. Martin, Planning Engineer
  • R. J. Brackett, Station Senior Q. A. Engineer B. Carney, Associate Engineer/Maintenance N. Edwards, Associate Engineer/Operations H. Roach, Clerical Supervisor
  • K. R. Wilson, Engineer (CGO)

. *Denotes those present at the Exit Intervie RII Rpt. No. 50-269/78-23 1-2 2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspecte. Unresolved Items No new unresolved items this report perio.

Exit Interview The inspector met with M J. E. Smith and members of his staff (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on September 29, 197 At this meeting, the inspector discussed the areas inspected and summarized the inspection findings as discussed in this report. In the areas inspected the licensee was informed that no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Refueling Maintenance The inspector conduced a review of the following Unit 3 refueling maintenance activities:

a. Work Requests Title 54607 PM Equipment Hatch Hoist 54611 Main Steam Relief Valve Set Point 51050 Pressurizer Relief Valve, RC-67 Testing 96355 Core Flood Valves CF1 and CF2 Stem Replace ment b. Procedures Title MP/0/A/1200/26 Disassembly and reassembly of Walworth Pressure Seal Valves MP/0/A/1800/1 Control of materials on open safety-related systems TN/1/A/ON-1067 Procedure for implementation and verification of NSM-ON-1067

RII Rpt. No. 50-269/78-23 1-3 Replacement Modification 1067 of Core Flood Flood CF-1 and CF-2 Valve Stems The inspector observed and/or reviewed modification 1067 performed by Work Request (WR)

96355, noting that procedures applicable to this maintenance activity were administratively approved, procedures were at the work location, procedures were being followed, procedure steps were being signed off by appro priate personnel, and health physics coverage was provided as require _ Maintenance Activity Reviews and Acceptance Criteria The Unit 3 refueling maintenance activities of 5.a, 5.b and above were reviewed by the inspector to verify that:

-

The maintenance activities were accomplished using approved procedures by qualified personne The required administrative approvals were obtained prior to initiating maintenance activitie The maintenance activities were inspected in accordance with the licensee's requirement Provisions for assuring that system valves, breakers, etc.,

are aligned for normal servic Provisions for testing equipment following maintenanc The inspector used one or more of the following acceptance criteria for the above items:

-

Technical Specifications

-

Final Safety Analysis Report

-

ANSI 18.7-1972

-

Nuclear Station Directives 3.3.5, 3.3.15, and 3.1 Administrative Policy Manual, Section 3.3, 4.2, and RII Rpt. No. 50-269/78-23 1-4 Findings The inspector found that the Master File of maintenance procedure MP/O/A/1200/26,

"Disassembly and Reassembly of Walworth Pressure Seal Valves",

was missing the referenced two pages of Revision 1 of MP/O/A/1200/26 as referenced on the Procedure Major Change Process Record For However, the Control Copy of MP/O/A/1200/26 contained all required revisions and the Master File copy was corrected immediately and the inspector had no further concerns with this maintenance procedur The inspector reviewed Work Request (WR)

54611, Main Stream Relief Valve Set Point, noting that enclosure 13.3,

"Data Sheet for Main Stream Relief Valve Test",

indicated MS-12 valve acceptance range was out of specifications (high). Further investigation disclosed that the wrong pressure was transcribed from the working field cop The pressure was corrected on the file copy and initialled by the individual who performed the tes The inspector had no further concern with Work Request (WR)

5461 However, it was pointed out that this acceptance data had been reviewed by a supervisor and accepted by an appropriate reviewer; and that caution must be taken to ensure that the data reviewed is correct and meets the acceptance criteri The licensee management was in agreement with the above concer o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No.:

50-269/78-23 Docket No.:

50-269 License No.: DPR-38 Licensee:

Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street P. 0. Box 2178 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility Name:

Oconee Unit 1 Inspection at:

Oconee Site, Seneca, South Carolina Inspection conducted:

September 26-29, 1978 Inspector: A. H. Johnson Accompanying Personnel: None Reviewed by:

,4 R. D. Martin, Chief Nuclear Support Section No. 1 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on September 26-29, 1978: (Report No. 50-269/78-23)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection performed on refueling maintenance accomplished on safety-related equipment including procedures, plant work requests, clearances and administrative control The inspection involved 29 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspecto Results:

In the areas inspected, no item of noncompliance or deviations were identified.