IR 05000369/1986021

Forwards Insp Repts 50-369/86-21 & 50-370/86-21 on 860621-0820,notice of Violation & Enforcement Conference Summary.Insp Repts & Ltr Sent on 860918.W/o Repts

ML20215C070
Person / Time
Site:	Mcguire, McGuire
Issue date:	12/04/1986
From:	Walker R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Tucker H DUKE POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8612150015
Download: ML20215C070 (4)

Text

, . -

]  %

DEC 04 R i:

DocketNos.150-369,'50-370 License Nos. NPF-9, NPF-17-

. Duke Power Company LAYtN: Mr. H. 'B. Tucker, Vice President Nuclear Production Department

422-South Church Street

' Charlotte, NC 28242 Gentlemen: -

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-369/86-21 AND 50-370/86-21)

This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Conunission (NRC) inspection conducted by W. T. Orders on June 21 - August 20,1986. The inspection included a review of activities . authorized for your McGuire facility. At the. conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed inspection repor The report documenting this inspection was sent to you with a letter dated September 18, 198 NRC concerns relative to the inspection findings were discussed by Dr. J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator, NRC, Region II, with G. E. Vaughn, General Manager, in an Enforcement Conference held on October 10, 198 Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observation of activities in progres The inspection findings indicate that certain activities appeared'to violate NRC requirements. The violations, references to pertinent requirements, and elements to be included in your response are described in the enclosed Notice of Violatio 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 Roo The responses directed by this letter and its enclosures are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-51 PDR ADOCK0500g9 ,

G I ZE~oI

~ _ .

m .,

1.-- G : DEC 04n

Duke' Power Company 2 Should you have' any_ questions. concerning this letter, please contact us. -

Sincerely,

.

OrfLmot kp d MA /2np {gm Roger D. Walker, Director Division of Reactor Projects-Enclosures:

~ Notice of Violation Enforcement Conference Suninary

,cp w/encis:

T. L. McConnell, Station Manager -

-

bec w/encls:

G Jenkins, RII IJdC Resident Inspector X Hood, NRR Document Control Desk State of North Carolina

-

RII RII R ,

W j

1es:lb RII[

'

VBrownelee

-

GJen ns ' alk

'

}t/p/86 11/ / /86 14/3/86

-

M/t/86 lt

,,, a

.

,

.

-

'

-

M,

.*n;

j +

-

,

7,.

.

,

-

.

.

y h ,1 -

,

,

<

m : ;g ,

,

.

~

t ,

x4

' ' '

, ,

'

' ENCLOSURE 1-

'

,

<

NOTICE OF VIOLATION-

.- ,

,

, .,,

Duke Power Corporation Docket Hos. 50-369:and 50-370

McGuire~UnitsL1-and 2: License Nos.'NPF-9 and NPF-17-During the' Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (NRC) inspection conducted on June 21

,

,' - August'20, 1986. violations, of NRC requirements were Eidentifie The'

violations involved a failure of a moto_r_ operated auxillary feedwater pump to -

'

start land a lack of-proper design / maintenance interface. In accordance with the

" General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement .: Actions,"

~10 CFR Part 2, Appendix,C (1986), the violations are listed below: Technical Specification 3.3.2 requires that 'the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System-(ESFAS) instrumentation channels shown in Table 3.3-3,be -

operable. Table 3.3-3,tItem 7.g requires that when the plant is operating in Modes l'or 2,Linstrumentation channels be operable to automatically start both motor-driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps (AFP) after the trip of all Main ~

FeedwaterPumps-(MFP).

Contrary. to the above.- Unit 2 operated intermittently in Mode 2 -from June 18, 1986, until June 25, 1986, with DCB breaker 6B in the open position. As .a result, the capability of the 28 motor-driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump to automatically start after a trip of all MFPs was defeated. -

Consequently, AFP 28 failed to automatically start upon loss of all MFPs during an event on June 25, 198 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I). This violation is applicable to Unit 2 onl .

B '. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, requires that measures be established to assure that applicable requirements are correctly trans-lated into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions and that these , measures include provisions to assure that appropriate quality standards are specified and included in design documents.. It also requires

-

that measures be established for the selection and review for suitability of application of materials, parts, equipment, and processes that are essential to safety-related function Contrary to the above, the licensee's design control program was inadequate as indicated by the following examples: Design control was inadequate in that the torque switch setting for valves 1 NV-7 and 2 NV-7, the normal let down isolation valves outside containment, did not meet the design criteria. The valves had a licensee specified torque switch setting of 55 percent of full-rate q% 1 ODA0$$

4'P'

. - -

'

Duke Power Company- 2 Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 McGuire Units-1 and 2 License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17 torque which was lower than the 85 percent specified by tne manu-facturer to assure that the valves would perform their intended function. As a result, valve 1 NV-7 was not fully operable from 1981 until May 1986, and valve 2 NY-7 was not fully operable from 1983 until May 1986, as required by Technical Specification 3.6. . Electric motor operators (EM0) for valves NI-9 and NI-10 (Reactor Coolant Cold Leg Injection from the Charging Pumps), for both units were found on May 7-8, 1986, to be insufficiently sized to guarantee opening of the valves under worst case design conditions (maximum differential pressure of 2735 psi). The motor operators for valves NI-9 and NI-10 for both units were originally specified by the manufacturer to be 43 rpm and 190 ft-lbs. The valves were initially installed on both units with the correct motor operator Because several valves did not meet required stroke times during Unit 1 pre-operational testing, the design was changed by the licensee, resulting in the deficient torque rating of the replacement motor operator This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).

t Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, McGuire is hereby required to submit to this Office within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice a

(1)written statement admission or explanation or denial in rep (ly including for each violation:2) the reason for th of the violation, admitted, (3) the corrective steps which . hav9 been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response tim FOR THE NUCLEA R UAT0hYCOMMISSION

/ /

sA A

'

'

Roger D. Walker irector Division of R ctor Projects Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 4th day of December 1986

yr

~

• -

..y,.

,

h 4'

ENCLOSURE 2 ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE-SUMMARY License: Duke Power Company

' Facility: McGuire Nuclear Statio License Nos.: NPF-9 and NPF-17 Docket Nos.: 50-369 and 50-370 On October 10, 1986, representatives of the Duke Power Company (DPC) met with members of the NRC Region II staff in Atlanta, Georgia to discuss .the Linsta11ation of motor operators which were not sized properly for the valve and for the disabled condition of the auto-start logic of the auxiliary feedwater pump. The following was discussed in detail: NRC Opening Remark . Duke Power Company Opening Remarks Overview of Events Description of Incident Sequence of Events Actions Taken Consequences Corrective Action Design prncess and Corrective Action a.. . Design Change Authorization Process Corrective Actions Duke Power Company Closing Remarks NRC Closing Remarks In. closing, the NRC expressed that the meeting had enhanced the understanding of the inciderot and the extensive corrective actions taken by the license Attachment:

Attendance List

r

_

. .: A * : ' .

.

.

'

.

,

L I'

ATTACHMENT L ATTENDANCE LIST m

Duke Power Company

-

G.IE. Vaughn, General Manager,. Nuclear Stations

T.-L. McConnell, Station Manager, McGuire N. McCraw, Compliance Engineer N. Estep, Associate Engineer W. Revels, Design Engineer R. L. Gill, Licensing Engineer

.

T. Edwards, Design Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J. N.- Grace, Regional Administrator G. R. Jenkins, Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff (EICS)

R. D. Walker, Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)

V.W.Panciera,DeputyDirector,DivisionofReactorSafety(DRS)

V.-L. Brownlee, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 2 DRP W. T. Orders, Senior Resident Inspector, McGuire

'F. Jape, Section Chief. Test Programs C. W. Burger, Project Engineer H. Wong, Senior Enforcement Specialist