IR 05000369/1979036
| ML19262B529 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1979 |
| From: | Donat T, Dyer J, Moon B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19262B521 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-79-36, NUDOCS 7912280174 | |
| Download: ML19262B529 (7) | |
Text
.
.
/
jo UNITED STATES
'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
o
$
E REGION 11
.
[
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SulTE 3100 i
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 g*****
o
.
Report No. 050-369/79-36 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility Name: McGuire Nuclear Station License No. CPPR-83 Inspection at McGuire Nuclear Station near Charlotte, North Carolina Inspectors://g,% o h b-,Wi
/ //.2 //7f T. J. Donatd Da'te 4 signed b-5,
/ e-r l]
YW - w i//2//?f
~ g T. Mggn B
/
Dite Signed
,
Approved by:
/
hN, o e e W/7 3 / ?
C J. A. Dyer, Acting Sect' ion Chief, RONS Branch DateSigned)
Inspection on October 9-11, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 40 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of preoperational test procedure review, completed preoperational test package review, and followup on previous inspection findings.
Results In the areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1648 349
.
meeso / 7
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees:
- M. D. McIntosh, Station Manager
- W. M. Sample, Technical Services and Licensing Project Engineer
- C. P. Rodgers, I&E Maintainance Engineer
- L. E. Weaver, Performance Engineer M. Pacetti, Test Engineer D. Marquis, Assistant Engineer D. Simmons, Associate Engineer
- G. Massey, Associate Engineer G. Figueroa, Maintainance Planning Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 11, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The inspectors reviewed the inspection activities and identified those items which would remain open pending additional review.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Followup on Previous Inspection Findings The inspectors reviewed various open items. The status on these items is indicated below:
a.
Emergency Procedures (1)
(Closed) Open Item (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a.(1)a).
This concerned the opening of the IND-15 valve during the Hot Leg Recirculation phase of a LOCA. The LOCA procedure (EP/1/A/ 5000/03) has been revised by change number 8 to open valve IND 15.
This item is closed.
(2)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-03, Paragraph 7.a.(1).b.,
c., and d).
This concerned the implementation of steps in the LOCA procedure kbk0 b
.
.
.
-2-
.
to verify that certain automatic actions had occurred, specific symptoms existed, and certain systems were operating properly.
The licensee has drafted a revision (EP/1/A/5000/03) which incorporated the necessary automatic actions for case D in steps 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 1.2, and 3.5, respectively. These items are closed.
(3)
(Closed) Open items (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a. (2).a, b, and c.).
This concerned the implementation of verification of certain automatic actions, personnel notification and primary system pressure control via the charging and letdown system in the loss of RHR procedure. The licensee has drafted a revision to (EP/1/A/5000/12) which incorporates these items in steps 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, 3.1, and 8.8.6, respectively. These items are closed.
(4)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a. (3). ). This concerned the need to establish whether any radioactivity was released to the environment during a loss of containment integrity. The licensee incorporated the provision to determine the amount of any radioactivity released in step 3.4 of procedure EP/1/A/5000/23.
This item is closed.
(5)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a. (4). ). This concerned the verification of the automatic loss of the condenser steam dumps upon the loss of the C-9 Permissive interlock, in the Loss of Condenser Vacuum Procedure. The licensee incorporated the provision in step 2.1.3 of EP/1/A/5000/18. This item is closed.
(6)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a.(5).).
This item concerned adding notification to plant personnel when the control room is being evacuated during the loss of control room emergency procedure. The licensee incorporated the provision in step 3.1 of the draft procedure (EP/1/A/5000/22).
This item is closed.
(7)
(Closed) Open items (79-16-03, paragraphs 7.a.(6).a. and b.).
Paragraph 7.a.(6).a concerned the inclusion of additional symptoms to better differentiate the Feedwater Line Rupture from the Steam Line Rupture in procedure EP/0/A/5000/07. The feedwater line break symptoms are the Steam Flow /Feedwater Flow Mismatch and an -
initial reactor coolant system heatup if the break is upstream of the feedwater system check valve.
The licensee has created a separate procedure for the feedwater line break, (EP/1/A/5000/19)
and implemented the mismatch symptom in steps 1.1 and 1.2 and the initial reactor coolant system heatup symptom in step 1.3.
Paragraph 7.a.(6).b concerned the identification of which steam generator and the location of a break affected by a feedwater line rupture. Step 3.5 of EP/1/A/5000/19 incorporates the neces-sary action. These items are closed.
(8)
(Open) Open item (79-16-03, paragraph 7.a.(7).).
This concerned the incorporation of pertinent technical specification requirements 1648 351
.
.
.
.
-3-into particular procedures in accordance with Administrative Policy Manual, Section 4.2.3.4.(b).
The licensee is in the process of determining the requirements and studying an effective way to implement those requirements into the appropriate pro-cedures. This item remains open.
b.
Instrument Procedures (1)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b.(1)).
This concerned the recording of test and calibration results on data sheets.
The inspector verified the incorporation of the nece esary recording requirements in IP/0/A/3000/5C by change number 3, ia IP/0/A/
3000/3A by change number 1, in IP/0/A/3000/9L by change number 1, in IP/0/A/3002/03 by change 1, and in IP/0/A/3003/04F by change number 2.
This item is closed.
(2)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b. (2). ).
This con-cerned the incorporation of signoffs in the prerequisite section of various procedures. The licensee incorporated the signoffs in IP/0/A/3008/02 per change number 1 and in IP/0/A/3000/9L per change number 1.
This item is closed.
(3)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b.(3).).
This con-cerned the format of the attached data sheets not being appli-cable for the procedure. The licensee changed data sheet formats to agree with the procedures in IP/0/A/3000/01 per change number 3, in IP/0/A/3000/05 per change number 2, and in IP/0/A/3003/3A per change number 1, respectively. This item is closed.
(4)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b.(4).).
(Paragraph 7.b.(4) of RII Rpt. This concerned the possibility of an incor-rect tolerance value. The licensee identified that the tolerance value is applicable for the signal source only and its range can be achieved. The inspector acknowledged this and closed the item.
(5)
(Closed) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b. (5)).
Paragraph 7.b.(5).a. concerned the designation of test points, component numbers, and connections. The licensee incorporated the appro-priate changes in IP/0/A/3050/6A per change number 1, in IP/0/
A/3003/4F per change number 2, in IP/0/A/3008/02 per change number 1, and in IP/0/A/3000/9L per change number 1.
Paragraph 7.b.(5).b concerned identifying test jacks in IP/0/A/3000/5C. The inspector acknowledged that the attached figure is appropriate to identify the test jacks. These items are closed.
(6)
(Closed) Open items '79-16-04, paragraphs 7.b. (6), a, b, e and e).
These items concerned the incorporation of miscellaneous comments. The licensee incorporated the comments in IP/0/A/
3000/9L per change number 1, in IP/0/B/3012/09 per change number 2, in IP/0/A/3003/3A per change number 1, and IP/0/A/3007/02A per change number 1, respectively.
These items are closed.
1648 352
.
.
.
'
-4-(7)
(0 pen) Open Item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b.(6).d)).
This concerned the development of enclosures 11.3.1 and 11.3.2 to IP/0/A/3001/02.
The licensee has not written these enclosures. This item remains open.
(8)
(0 pen) Open item (79-16-04, paragraph 7.b.(7)).
This concerned the incorporation of signed checkoffs by which a verification of.
completion of significant steps can be performed. Examples of the significant steps were exercising reactor half-trip switches, reactor trip bypass switches and restoration of system / component to normal state, etc.
The licensee did not agree with the sig-nificance of the above examples as well as the complexity existing in the instrument procedures. The licensee and inspector agreed to perform additional reviews of instrument procedures in order to resolve this portion of open item 79-16-04.
c.
(Closed) Open Item 78-21-01 concerning discrepancies between preoper-ational test TP/1/A/1200/03C and FSAR figure C.3.2-10 sheets 1, 2, 3 on the minimum acceptable flow rates for the different ESF systems.
The inspector reviewed revision 15 and 16 to FSAR figure 6.3.2-10 and the completed copy of TP/1/A/1600/03C. The minimum acceptable ESF flow rates in the test procedure are in agreement with the FSAR values.
This item is closed.
d.
(Open) Open Item 78-21-03 concerning the need to perform a time response test on each sensor or signal path associated with either the Reactor Protection System or the Safety Injection Initiation system.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for determining the overall time response.
It consists of three sections namely:
sensor response, electronic signal processor response, and final device response.
The sensor response is determined via IP/0/A/3010/06B for pressure and differential pressure transmitters, and IP/0/A/3010/06A for RTD's.
The final device response is measured via TP/1/A/2600/09 for the control rods and via TP/1/A/1200/03C for the safety injection system components.
The electronic processor timing is measured in TP/1/A/1600/03. The inspector has reviewed IP/0/A/3010/06A, IP/0/A/
3010/06B, TP/1/A/1200/03C, and TP/1/A/2600/07 and has no comments on them. Since TP1/A/1600/03 has not been written yet this item will remain open until the procedure has been issued and the inspector can review the procedure.
6.
Audit of Calibration Activities The inspector conducted a review of IP/0/A/3066/02, Rotork Actuator Corrective Maintenance and Work Request Number 2068, and monitored, on 10/10/79, the portions of the calibration activities performed on the rotork actuator values, NV222 and FW EV 32B.
The inspector also conducted a review of training records for two technicans performing the calibrations.
1648 353
.
.
-5-
,
The calibration above was reviewed to verify:
Review and approvals were being conducted and data was recorded and evaluated.
Test instruments were listed and identified in test results.
Adherence to proposed technical specifications and FSAR requirements.
-
The procedure's techrical content was correct and included verification that the equipment was returned to service and test equipment was removed.
The inspector used one or more of the following acceptance criteria for evaluating the above items in the calibration program:
Station Directives Manual, Section 2.3.
- Control of Measuring and
.
Test Equipment; Station Directives Manual, Section 2.5 - Qualifications and Training
.
of Personnel; FSAR, Section 13 and Section 16;
.
ANSI N18.7 (1976), Administrative Controls for Nuclear Power Plants;
.
ANSI N45.2(1971), Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear
.
Power Plants; Industry Practice
.
Within the areas inspected, no open items were identified but ore inspector comment was generated. During the review of the training records, the inspector noted that one of the technicians who performed the calibration work for FW EW 32B valve did not have records indicating completion of necessary occupational training. During discussion with the licensee it was verified that the training records may not have been updated due to the fact that the technician is fairly new.
The inspector identified to the licensee that the performance of work on safety related equipment must be performed by qualified personnel once an operating license is issued.
The licensee acknowledge the inspector's comment.
7.
Review of Preoperational Test Procedures The inspectors reviewed TP/1/A/1200/03A, Engineered Safety Features Functional Test, for conformance to FSAR sections 6.3, 8.3 and 14.1 and Regulatory Guide 1.68.
The inspector noted that the actuation of the containment spray pump was initiated after the 25 sec diesel load sequence time had elapsed by simulating the existance of two containment HI-HI pressure signals. Actual pump operation was verified nine seconds later.
In all other instances, diesel generator load sequence times specified in FSAR table 8.1.2-1 were confirmed. The inspectors had no comment on the procedure.
)bk0
-
,
.
-6-8.
Review of Completed Preoperational Test Packages The completed test procedure data packages for the following preoperational tests were reviewed:
TP/1/A/1250/06, MSIV Timing Functional Test"
.
TP/1/A/1200/03C, " Safety Injection Pump and Flow Adjustment Functional
.
Test" #1 TP/1/A/1200/03D, "NI Accumulation Functional Test"
.
TP/1/A/1200/03E, " Safety Injection System Check Valve Functional Test"
.
TP/1/A/1200/03F, " Upper Head Injection System Functional Test"
.
TP/1/A/1200/03G, " Safety Injection System Pump and Flow Adjustment
.
Functional Test"#2 TP/1/A/1200/02, "ND System Functional Test"
.
.
.
The review included:
Verification that all test change notices had been properly generated a.
and incorporated into the procedures.
b.
Verification that all deficiencies had been properly resolved in accordance with Duke Power Company procedures.
Verification that signatures and dates had been entered for each step c.
in the procedure and on each data sheet.
d.
Verified that all of the test data had successfully met the acceptance criteria or a test deficiency was written against it and resolved.
The inspectors findings were clear in this area.
)()k0 b