IR 05000269/1979036
| ML19262C308 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 12/26/1979 |
| From: | Jape F, Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19262C302 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-79-36, 50-287-79-36, 50-370-79-33, NUDOCS 8002110225 | |
| Download: ML19262C308 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:# 'o,, UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION , o $ $ REGION ll
. ~# 101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100 \\..( # g'* ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 .. Report Nos. 50-269/79-36, 50-270/79-33, and 50-287/79-36 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility: Oconee Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287 License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 Inspection at: Oconee IJn lear Station near Seneca, South Carolina Inspector.
h'k[M _. k.
/.2 -26-79 , F. Jape [/ / Date Signed Approved by: / _ 7,.f A [[( - '. /7 2g "[[ R. D. PlaVtin," Acting"Sdetion Chief, RONS Branch Date Signed I ' ~ SUMMARY Inspection on November 1-30, 1979 Areas Inspected: This routine, unannounced inspection involved 77 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of plant operations, LER review and followup, review of selected emergency procedures, review of drawing control and review of selected test data.
Results: Of the five areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
. 1947 301 800,3
. DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees Duke Power Company - Oconee Nuclear Station
- J. E. Smith, Station Manager
- J. M. Davis, Superintendent of Mantenance
- J. N. Pope, Superintendent of Operations
- R. M. Koehler, Superintendent of Technical Services
- R. T. Bond, Licensing and Projects Engineer R. C. Adams, I&E Engineer
- J. Brackett, Senior QA Engineer H. W. Morgan, Shift Supervisor J. W. Herring, Shift Supervisor T. D. Patterson, Shif t Supervisor G. B. Jones, Shif t Supervisor D. W. Yoh, Shift Supervisor L. C. Evans, Assistant Shif t Supervisor D. L. Gordan, Assistant Shif t Supervisor R. T. Scott, Assistant Shift Supervisor W. R. Pollard, Assistant Shift Supervisor D. F. Roth, Assistant Shift Supervisor W. A. Horton, Assistant Shift Supervisor F. E. Owens, Assistant Shift Supervisor C. M. Sheridon, Assistant Shift Supervisor E. G. LeGette, Assistant Shift Supervisor O. C. Kohler, Assistant Shift Supervisor P. J. Chudzik, Assistant Shift Supervisor E. A. Force, Assistant Shift Supervisor S. M. Pryor, Assistant Shift Supervisor L. L. Howell, Assistant Shift Supervisor G. A. Ridgeway, Unit 1 Operating Engineer J. T. Campbell, Unit 2 Operating Engineer B. C. Moore, Unit 3 Operating Engineer D. Taylor, Assistant Engineer, I&E E. Hite, Associate Engineer, I&E T. Glenn, Associate Engineer, ISE F. Siurua, Junior Engineer, I&E Other licensee employees contacted included 5 technicians, 15 operators, 2
' mechanics, and 2 office personnel.
Other Organizations Duke Power Company - Lee Station
- Attended exit interview i947 302
. -2-2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 16, 21, and 28, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. The inspection findings were acknowledged by the licensee without significant comment. An area of concern regarding maintaining up-to-date drawings was discussed.
(See Paragraph 8.) Licensee responded by stating a change in the system is forthcoming.
3.
, Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Infraction (287/79-15-01) Failure to follow procedure for alignment of 3LP59 which contributed to a spill of radioactive liquid.
Licensee's response, dated August 10, 1979, outlined corrective measures. These were verified by the Resident NRC Inspector. A modification, NSM-1339, has been initiated to redesign the vent piping shich will prevent liquid spills through the vent line.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Operations Throughout the reporting period, the inspector reviewed operating records to maintain continuous cognizance of plant operations. The records reviewed included the control room log, shift supervisors log, removal and restoration logs, periodic test data and instrument recordings.
Interviews with a number of plant operations and maintenance personnel were held on day and night shifts. Supervisor and control room operator actions were observed during the shift and at shift change. The actions and activi-ties were conducted as prescribed in Section 3.1 of the Station Directives.
Personnel on each shift met or exceeded the minimum required by IEB 79-05C.
Also, watch assignments were met to satisfy commitments for HPI valving and KI invertor loss. Control room operators were responsive to annunciator alarms and appeared to be cognizant of plant status.
During the report period, compliance with the following technical specifi-cations was verified: TS 2.2.1, Reactor Coolant System Pressure, all units.
TS 2.3, Protective Instrumentation Setpoints, all units.
TS 3.1.1, Reactor Coolant System Operational Status, all unitr , TS 3.1.2, Pressurization, Heatup and Cooldown Limits, all units.
TS 3.1.6, Reactor Coolant System Leakage, all units.
TS 3.2, High Pressure Injection System, all units.
TS 3.3, Emergency Core Cooling and Reactor Building Spray Systems, all units.
TS 3. 7, Auxiliary Electrical Systems, all units.
' TS 3.16, Hydrogen Purge System, all units.
1947 303
-3- . Plant tours were taken by the inspector throughout the report period.
Observations were made during the tours of housekeeping and cleanliness, ongoing activities, security, equipment sta'us and radiation control prac-tices. In general, housekeeping and cleanlinecs were found to be satisfactory.
Radiation control practices were adhered to duriot the periods of observation.
There were no fluid leaks, or excessive piping vibrations noted during the tour.
Lock out tags on equipment required to be tagged were found as specified by Station Directive 3.1.1.
No fire hazards were observed.
Within the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Review of Licensee Event Reports The inspector performed an in-office review of nonroutine event reports to verify that the report details met license requirements, identified the cause of the event, described corrective actions appropriate for the iden-tified cause, adequately addressed the event and any generic implications.
In addition, for those reports marked with an asterisk, the inspector examined selected operating and maintenance logs and records and internal incident investigation reports. Personnel were interviewed to verify that the report accurately reflected the circumstances of tha 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:
- R0-269/79-16, HPSW Pump Inoperable R0-269/79-17, Containment Isolation Valve Inoperable
- RO-269/79-20, Hydraulic Shock Suppressors Inoperable R0-269/79-21, LPI Cooler Leak
- RO-269/79-22, HPSW Pump Inoperable
- R0-269/79-26, One Keowee Hydro Unit Incperable to the Overhead Feeder R0-269/79-27, Main Feeder Bus Isolated R0-269/79-28, RCS Leakage in Excess of 1.0 GPM
- R0-269/79-29, RV Head Flange Leak R0-269/79-30, Penetration Room Ventilation System Inoperable
- RO-269/79-31, HPSW Pump Inoperable
- RO-269/79-32, Hydrogen Purge Unit Inoperable
- RO-269/79-33, CR Group Overlays Limit Exceeded
- RO-269/79-34, NI's Out-of-Calibration
- R0-270/79-5, RB Gaseous Rad Monitors Inoperable R0-270/79-6, Penetration Room Isloation Valve Inoperable
- RO-270/79-7, LPI Cooler Outlet Valves Misaligned
,
- R0-287/79-11, RCS Pressure Exceeded 350 Psig with LPI System Out-of-Service 7.
Review of Eme c icy Procedures Following a a-.at event involving loss of power supply to the 3KI Bus, the licensee has,,rovided emergency procedures, listed below for this situation.
These procedures were reviewed and found satisfactory by the NRC inspector.
1947 304
. -4- . The review was performed to ascertain or verify that the procedure reviews and approvals by the licensee were in agreement with Technical Specification 6.1 and that the contents were not in conflict with Technical Specifications.
Also, the contents were examined to determine if the procedure was adequate to control the event.
The procedures reviewed were: EP/182/A/1800/31, Loss of 1,2kI Buses (And Control Room Indications Powered from KI).
EP/3/A/1800/31, Loss of 3KI Buses (And Control Room Indications Powered from 3KI).
8.
Drawing Control Administrative procedures were reviewed to verify that controls have been established and are functioning for drawing distribution and control. The administrative controls are contained in Station Directive 2.1.1.
The review consisted of selecting 30 drawings at random and obtaining the revision number and drawing status from the master drawing index. These data were the compared with the drawings in the three control rooms, and the licensing and projects engineer files.
In general, the drawings were found to be in agreement with the master index. The one area of concern expressed by the inspector was the fact that many drawings are marked " superseded" due to outstanding modifications.
The drawings are used by operations personnel for system removal and restora-tion activities. And even though the drawing may be marked superseded, the potential for errors is increased.
Licensee management acknowledged this finding and stated that the system for maintaining drawings up-to-date is being revised. The new plans are to provide accurate drawings for use by plant operators. A new program is cxpected to begin implementation within the next several months.
9.
Review of Test Data During the shutdown of Unit 1, at 15% power, the licensee performed TT/1/A/ 325/3, Motor Driven Emergency Feedwater Pump to OTSG Flow Test.
This procedure tested the full flow operability of the newly installed motor driven emergency feed water pumps. A flow of 600 gpm to each steam gener-ator was measured at a steam pressure of 880 psig. The system fulfilled its intended function and the test data were within the augance criteria.
, Similar tests were conducted on units 2 and 3.
This completes planned testing of the new motor driven emergency feedwater system. Within the areas reviewed, no items of noncompliance were identified.
047 305 }}