IR 05000269/1988013
| ML20150B652 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1988 |
| From: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8807120105 | |
| Download: ML20150B652 (4) | |
Text
...
.ghb A
'
'
..
.
y
,
JIIN 2 7.1988 Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, DPR-55 Duke Power Company ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President Nuclear Production Department-422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: MEETING SUMMARY (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS.:
50-269/88-13, 50-270/88-13, AND 50-287/88-13)
This letter refers to the meeting conducted at our request in the NRC Region II office on June 7,1988.
This was a management meeting to discuss concerns
.
resulting from recent events and a Quality Assurance Effectiveness inspection at Oconee.
Enclosed are a summary of the meeting and a list of attendees.
In accordance with Section 2.790' of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," Part 2.
.
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations', a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public-Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will-be pleased to discuss them.
Sincerely, J.
elson Grace Regional Administrator Enclosures:
1.
Meeting Summary 2.
List of Attendees cc w/encls:
M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager-bec w/encis:
N NRC Resident inspector DRS Technical Assistant i
H. Pastis, NRR
Document Control Desk i
State of South Carolina Ril Rll RII R
R RIl i
ser TP es VBro niee
-
n
. eyes t
[!6/p/88 6/p/88 6/9 /88 p
//88 6/)//88 6/1-1/88
\\
!
8807120105 880627 PDR ADOCK 05000269 gey(
_- -
-
.
.
'
'
t
,.
m ENCLOSURE 1 MEETING SUMMARY J
Licensee: Duke Power Company Facility: Oconee Docket Nos.: 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 A management meeting was held in_ the NRC Region II office on: June 7,1988 to.
. discuss concerns regarding control room. demeanor, configuration control, falsification of records and other issues resulting from a Quality Assurance (QA) Effectiveness inspection (Inspection Report 50-269,270,287/88-13) at Oconee.
-
The Regional Administrator opened the meeting by briefly stating the NRC's concerns regarding the issues mentioned above.
The Vice President Nuclear
~
Production and the Oconee Station Manager then led Duke Power Company's (DPC)
discussion of these concerns.
Control Ruom Demeanor DPC began by listing some of the significant changes they;had made to enhance ctitrol room activities.
These changes included:. implementing a 12-hour shif t rotation, limiting control room access, performing tag-out activities on the back shift, going to' standard dress, team training, previewing most work by the operations. staff before reaching the control room, and developing a professional code of_ conduct.
Specific events relating to control room demeanor that the NRC QA-inspection team had observed at Oconee were then discussed. -Duke stated that in general control room demeanor was professional and a: breakdown had not occurred.
- Configuration Control The NRC QA team had performed a Reactor Protection-System and Engineered Safeguards wiring diagram verification in the back panel area of the control room and had found approximately 50 discrepancies.
Following a discussion of some specific discrepancies, the NRC made the point that if the equipment and drawings do not agree, then a baseline does not exist -
and consequently the function of the wiring is suspect.
Duke committed to review the wiring discrepancies and submit an action plan to the NRC.
'
,
i
-
. -.
_.
_
_ _.
.
,
.'
Enclosure 1
-
Falsification of Records Two cases were discussed.
In one-case, the Resident Inspectors-identified
~
incorrect fire watch logs.and an omission of/or late fire watch rounds.
In the second case, identified by the QA team, a performance technician _ had knowingly entered an incorrect valve stroke time into a performance test.
DPC explained how plant management tries to foster an atmosphere of openness which allows employees to admit their mistakes, learn from them, and not be penalized.
DPC admitted.that mistakes _were made-in both cases.
In the cases-where the fire watches and logs were not correct,.the DPC investigation revealed that a contributing factor may have been that.
employees, in addition to their fire watches, were also performing other jobs which they considered of higher priority.
In the second cace, the Duke performance technician admitted to changing a valve stroke time data sheet.
Following performance of a IWV valve stroke timing test on a reactor building sump suction valve, the perforr.ance technician changed the test documentation from 8 seconds to 5 seconds.
The Duke investigation revealed that the technician had substituted a page in the test procedure with the altered stroke time.
Duke stated that all Duke employees guilty of wrongdoing had been disciplined.
To allay NRC safety concerns regarding valve stroke timing and other tests that the performance technician had performed, Duke explained they verified other tests the technician had performed by comparing documented valve stroke times with computer times and previous tests by other technicians. This verification revealed one additional discrepancy on the same reactor building sump valve but there was no evidence to indicate foul play.
Duke also explained they had checked other performance tests completed by other technicians _ and did not identify any other discrepancies.
'
QA Effectiveness Inspection Other items resulting from the QA inspection relating to Inservice Inspection for valve stroke timing, valve ilP21 exceeding its stroke time, housekeeping in electrical panels, and incomplete work orders were also discussed.
During the discussion on valve stroke timing, NRC personnel clearly stated their position.
DPC personnel stated that they were not aware of this position.
.
-
- -
-
- -
-
. _ -_
. _.. _ _
.
.
.
A
..
.
-
o ENCLOSURE 2 LIST'0F ATTENDEES Duke Power Company H. B. Tucker, Vice President,' Nuclear Production M. Tuckman, Station Manager, 0conee W. W. Foster, Superintendent of Maintenance, Oconee J. M. Davis, Superintendent of Technical Services, Oconee D. Sweigart, Superintendent of Operations, Oconee N. Rutherford, Manager, Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission-J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator M. L. Ernst Deputy Regional Administrator L.A.Reyes, Director,DivisionofReactorProjects(DRP)
C. W. Hehl, Deputy Director, DRP
,
A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)
E. W. Merschoff, Deputy Director, DRS G. C. Lainas, Assistant Director for Region II Reactors, NRR G. R. Jenkins, Director, Enforcement and-Investigation Coordination Staff (EICS)
P. Skinner, Senior Resident Inspector, Oconee T. A. Peebles, Section Chief, DRP G. A. Belisle, Section Chief, DRS R. J. Goddard, Regional Counsel M. C. Shannon, Reactor Inspector, DRS l
K. R. Jury, Reactor Inspector, DRS L. S. Mellen, Reactor Inspector, DRS T. A. Cooper, Reactor Inspector, DRS L. D. Wert, Resident Inspector, O o nee
B. R. Bonser, Project Engineer, DRP E. Lea, Reactor Inspector, DRS i
B. A. Breslau, Reactor Inspector, DRS j
,
l
.
.
.
.
-
-
-