IR 05000369/1979006
| ML19270F858 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 02/14/1979 |
| From: | Cantrell F, Cottle W, Wessman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19270F856 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-79-06, 50-369-79-6, NUDOCS 7903270628 | |
| Download: ML19270F858 (7) | |
Text
.
- g mRtou'o,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
REGION il
&
}
(
,$
101 MAPIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30303
. v/
.....
Report No. : 50-369/79-06 Docket No. : 50-369 License No. - CPPR-83 Licensee: Duke Power Company Post Office Box 33189 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility Name: McGuire Nuclear Station Inspection at: McGuire Nuclear Station, Cornelius, North Carolina Inspection conducted: January 8-12, 1979 Inspectors:
W. T. Cottle R. H. Wessman Accompanying Per
.1:
one Approved by:
W-r
//
f S'. Cantrell, Act@ S6ction Chief Date Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on January 8-12, 1979 (Report No. 50-369/79-06)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of system operating proce-
_
dures; preoperational testing activities; safety committee activities; and review of records storage facilities. The inspection involved 70 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results: In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
790327 0 (cd8
'
.
.
DETAILS Prepared by:
,r -
,T Mm fyez,,gg7 W. T. Cottle, Reactor Inspector Date Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support ranch 6Cmn 2/,+/n
),
R. H. Wessman, Reactor Inspector
' Da te Reactor Projects Section No. 1 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Dates of Inspect'
J nuary 8-12, 1979
-
Reviewed by:
_
/_// Y
/
F.K'. 'Cantrell, Acpg' Chief
' DaTe
'
Re' actor Project Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch 1.
Persons Contacted
- M. McIntosh, Station Manager
- G. Cage, Superintendent of Operations
- D. Rains, Superintendent of Maintenance
- T. McConnell, Superintendent of Technical Services
- W. Barron, Assistant Operating Engineer
- D. Bradshaw, Operating Engineer
- A.
Batts, Junior Engineer
- R.
Wilkinson, Superintendent of Administrative Services
- M. Geddie, Startup Coordinator M. Sample, Technical Services Engineer E. Estep, Associate Engineer G. Gilbert, Operating Engineer J. Cox, Senior QA Engineer
- T. Owens, Station Chemist The inspector also inte:rviewed several other licensee employees, including operations aad technical support personnel,
- Present at the Exit Int'rview on January 12, 197 '
.
.
-2-2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations. An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 8.
4.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on January 12, 1979. The inspectors summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings.
5.
Records Storage Facility The inspector requested that the licensee review the adequacy of the site and corporate records storage facilities with respect to the requirements of NFPA Standard 232-1975.
In performing the evaluation, the licensee was requested to consider one of the following alternatives as constituting an acceptable records storage facility:
A two-hour vault meeting NFPA 232 without additional provisions.
a.
b.
Two-hour rated containers meeting NFPA 232 (Class B) without additional provisions.
c.
Two-hour rated fire resistant file room meeting NFPA 232 with the following additional provisions.
(1) Early warning fire detection and automatic fire suppression should be provided, with electronic supervision at a constantly attended central station.
(2) Records should be stored in fully enclosed metal cabinets.
Records should not be pe rmitted on open steel shelving.
No storage of records should be permitted on the floor of the facility.
Adequate access and aisle ways should be maintained at all times throughout the facility.
(3) Work not directly associated with records storage or retrieval should be prohibited within the storage facility.
Examples of such prohibited activities include but are not limited to:
records reproduction, film developing, and fabrication of micro-fiche card.
.
-3-(4) Smoking and eating / drinking should be prohibited throughout the storage facility.
(5) Ventilation, temperature and humidity control equipment should be protected inside with standard fire-door dampers where they penetrate fire barriers bounding the storage facility.
Licensee was requested to identify those areas in which substantial changes would be required in order to upgrade the existing facilities to the requirements of NFPA 232 and/or those areas in which the require-ments of hTPA 232 were deemed to be impractical. The input from the review will be utilized in further evaluation of the hTC's current policy concerning the protection requirements of vital records.
Licensee representatives agreed to conduct the review and forward the results to Region II.
6.
Safety Committee Activities The inspector reviewed the minutes of the initial meeting of the McGuire Nuclear Safety Review Board (NSRB).
The meeting was held at the McGuire Nuclear Station on October 2, 1978. The NSRB aembers were briefed on the important features of the site, layout of major equipment and the status of the preoperational test program. The Board then discussed with site personnel the station actions in response to Incident Reports, NRC Inspection Reports, and QA Audits.
The inspector discussed the meeting minutes and the plans for subsequent meetings of the Board withthe NSRB Director. The Director stated that the Board will meet at least one more time prior to receipt of the Unit 1 operating license.
The inspector reviewed the status of open items concerning the onsite and of f-site safety review activities which were initially identified in Region II Report No. 50-369/78-28.
These items, identified as 78-28-02, 78-28-03, 78-28-04 and 78-28-05, will remain as open items.
- 'a items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Review of System Operating Procedures The inspector reviewed three system operating procedures for confor-mance to FSAR commitments, the provisions of the proposed Technical Specifications, the requirements of ANSI N18.7 (Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants), Regulatory Guide 1.33 (Quality Assurance Program Requirements-Operation), and station directives. The inspector reviewed the following procedures, and made comments as summarized below:
.
-4-a.
Upper llead Inspection, OP/1/A/6200/10, revision including changes through 8/4/78.
(1) The upper head injection control panels had handwritten instructions for valve operation taped to them.
They were consistent with the approved operating procedure, but were not approved instructions.
The inspector identified this item to a licensee representative and they were promptly removed.
(2) The plant limitations and precautions document is silent concerning the maximum UllI System boron concentration. The licensee stated that this limit was recently provided in the latest revision of the proposed technical specifications.
(3) System high and low pressure alarm setpoints are being revised pending design engineering input.
b.
Shutdown from Outside Control Room, OP/1/A/6100/04, revision including changes through 8/14/78.
(1) Panel or room locations of valves, pumps, pressurizer heaters, etc., that require local control have not been specified.
The licensee stated that this was not intended as qualified operators would know these locations. They would, however, consider the inspector's comments.
(2) Several components identified in section 3.2.11 of the procedure would require control room accessibility (low pressure safety injection block and low steam line precsure safety injection block).
c.
Chemical and Volume Control System, OP/1/A/6200/01, revision including changes through 8/24/78.
(1) This procedure is silent concerning two system operations:
(a) Shif ting the changing pump discharge valve lineup f rom NC Loop 1 (normal) to NC Loop 4 (alternate), and (b) Operation of the auxiliary spray valve, NV-21, using the charging system as the water source.
(2) Section 11.2.2 omits the position check of NY-258 and hT-259.
Section 11.2.5 omits the position check of NV-259.
Other inspector questions / comments regarding these three procedures were resolved. The licensee agreed to consider the foregoing comments in future revisions to these procedures (369/79-06-01).
.
-5-8.
Preoperational Testing Activities The inspector reviewed the completed test procedure packages for Reactor Coolant Pump Initial Operation, TP/1/A/1150/02 B, and Diesel Generator Initial Operation, TP/1/A/1350/22 A. The inspector examined the procedure discrepancy process records, the process records for procedure changes, and the data packages for both tests. The inspector noted that the diesel generator initial operation data package indicated that approximately 200 maintenance work requests initiated during the test were still outstanding. Licensee representatives indicated that the test record had not been updated to reflect completion of the work items and that there was no requirement in the test procedure to maintsin such a status.
The inspector pointed out that one of the objeccives of the test procedure was "to perform maintenance in the course of break-in operation" and that the completion of the mainte-nance items should be documented. This it em is designated as an open item (369/78-06-02) and will be further examined on a subsequent inspection.
The inspector witnessed inspection activities associated with TP/1/A/
1150/07, Reactor Coolant System Thermal Expansion and Restraint Test, at the 450 F plateau.
The test data recorded at the cold, 250 F, 350 F and 450 F plateaus was reviewed for completeness. The inspector noted that a reading for NC Loop B, Intermediate Leg, Point X had not been recorded at 350 F as required in the procedure. Further investi-gation revealed that the reading had been taken but had been lost.
The Test Engineer conferred with Design Engineering to verify that the missing reading would not affect the analysis of the test data and that the reading could be taken during plant cooldown at the end of hot functional testing.
The inspector reviewed the following operating procedures in use to support hot functional testing activities:
a.
OP/1/A/6150/22, Filling and Venting Reactor Coolant System for Hot Functional Testing b.
OP/1/A/6200/16, Residual Heal Removal Operation During Hot Func-tional Testing c.
OP/1/A/6100/11, Controlling Procedure for Unit Heatup During Hot Functional Testing The working copies of the above procedures were compared with the master file copies to verify that the working copies in use were updated to the current procedure change numbers reflected in the master copies. All prerequisites and procedural steps in each proce-dure appeared to have been properly executed and documented.
The
.
..
,
-6-inspector noted that in at least one instance, the valve checklist appeared to have been filled out by one individual transcribing the initials of several plant operators. Further investigation revealed that this practice was being done in those cases where the original checklists were soiled or torn in in plant use. The Superintendent of Operations agreed that this was not an acceptable practice and that steps would be taken to provide administrative guidance on the proper documentation of valve checklists.
This item is designated as open item 369/79-06-03.
In addition, the inspector noted that the 72-hour verifications of the working copies of OP/1/A/6100/11 and OP/1/A/6200.
OP/1/A/6200/16 required by Station Directive 4.2.1 did not appear to have been performed during the intervals January 1-6, 1979, and November 13-17, 1978, respectively.
This is designated as unresolved item 369/79-06-04.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Review of Control Room Logs The inspector reviewed selected portions of the Reactor Operator's logbooks and the Unit Supervisor's Log for the December 25, 1978 through January 11, 1979 period. These logs were reviewed for confor-mance to ANSI N18.7-1976 (Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants) and Station Directives 3.1.1 (Reactor Operator's Log) and 3.1.13 (Unit Supervisor's Log).
Various items relating to these logs which were discussed with the licensee are summarized as follows:
a.
Resolution of problems is not presented in the log. Maintenance or test records (if employed) which could indicate problem resolu-tion are not referenced. Three examples are provided:
(1) Log entries on December 29-30, 1978 state that reactor coolant pumps were stopped due to loss of seal injection.
The reason for the seal injection loss or the restoration of normal seal supply was not indicated prior to resuming reactor coolant pump operation.
(2) Reactor Coolant Pump "A" was stopped on December 27, 1978 due to high vibration.
Subsequent log entries reveal test efforts to determine the cause of the high vibration.
Resolution of the vibration problem was not indicated prior to returning the pump to operation on December 29, 1978.
(3) Reactor Coolant Pump "C" was stopped on December 26, 1978 due to high vibration.
It was subsequently restored to operation without indicating the problem's resolutio.
, -
,
t-7-b.
Review of logs by other shif ts is not being accomplished. Station directives are silent concerning such a review. Section 4.4 and 5.2.1 of ANSI N18.7 provide requirements for this type of review.
c.
The names of shif t personnel (and temporary reliefs, when appli-cable) are not reflected in the logs.
Station directives are silent concerning such a requirement. A Shift Supervisor Log for January 9,1979 was unsigned.
d.
Various other comments of a minor nature were made by the inspector.
The inspector reviewed typical " entries" to be made for a plant in operation.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments without commitment.
Logs will be inspected again on a future inspection (369/79-06-05).
10.
Plant Tour The inspectors toured the Unit I reactor building, auxiliary building, turbine building, and outside structures to observe test and construc-tion activities in progress and the status of the housekeeping effort.
Observations made by the inspectors and subsequently discussed with station management included:
Reactor Coolant System leak rate of 3-10 gpm.
a.
b.
Fluid leaks in reactor building systems.
c.
Pressurizer relief tank blowout plugs appear to be located such that they could strike pressurizer spray valves.
d.
Lack of noticable progress on Unit I housekeeping effort.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.