IR 05000369/1986038
| ML20207P273 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1987 |
| From: | William Orders, Peebles T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207P267 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-86-38, 50-370-86-38, NUDOCS 8701150335 | |
| Download: ML20207P273 (5) | |
Text
c :-
'
e SR Rffg UNITED STATES
'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
REGloN 11
"
o g
j 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- E t ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
\\...../
Report Nos.: 50-369/86-38 and 50-370/86-38 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: McGuire 1 and 2 Docket Nos.:
50-369 and 50-370 License Nos.:
NPF-9 and NPF-17 Inspection Conducted:
ovember 21 - December 20, 1986 Inspector: k,
. b1Afsu /w
/ fN W. Orders, Senlo sidenVIgirpector Dite S/gned'
Accompanying Personnel:
S. Guenther Approved by:
/!d[M T. AC P"eeble's,~Section Chief Dite' Sigfied Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection involved the areas of operations safety verification, surveillance testing, maintenance activities, event follow-up, and participation in a Duke Power /NRC management meeting.
Results: Of the areas inspected, no violations were identified. One unresolved item was identified in the area of plant operations (paragraph 5).
.
PDR O
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _________ _ _ _
_
. _ -
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees T. McConnell, Plant Manager B. Travis, Superintendent of Operations D. Rains, Superintendent of Maintenance
- B. Hamilton, Superintendent of Technical Services N. McCraw, Compliance Engineer M. Sample, Superintendent of Integrated Scheduling
- N. Atherton, Compliance Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview
~
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 30, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection. One Unresolved Item (369,370/86-38-01)
regarding the continuity of emergency power sources to load centers 1 and 2EMXH was discussed.
3.
Unresolved Items An unresolved item (UNR) is a matter about which more information is required to determine whether it is acceptable or may involve a violation or deviation. One new UNR was identified during this inspection period and is discussed in paragraph 5.
4.
Plant Operations The inspection staff reviewed plant operations during the report period, to verify conformance with applicable regulatory requirements.
Control room logs, shift supervisors' logs, shift turnover records and equipment removal and restoration records were routinely perused. Interviews were conducted with plant operations, maintenance, chemistry, health physics, and performance personnel.
Activities within the control room were monitored during shifts and at shift changes. Actions and/or activities observed were conducted as prescribed in applicable station administrative directives. The complement of licensed personnel on each shift met or exceeded the minimum required by Technical Specifications.
.
..
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
.
_
u
.
Plant tours taken during the reporting period included, but were not limited to, the turbine buildings, auxiliary building, Units 1 and 2 electrical equipment rooms, Units 1 and 2 cable spreading rooms, and the station yard zone inside the protected area.
During the plant tours, ongoing activities, housekeeping, security, equipment status and radiation control practices were observed.
Unit 1 Operations The unit started the reporting period in Mode 5 (cold shutdown), continuing the Rotork valve outage commenced on October 29, 1986.
The Rotork valve inspections, adjustments, and testing were completed on November 25 and preparations were begun to return the unit to service.
Mode 1 (power)
operations were resumed at 10:14 a.m.
on November 29, and the unit was placed on line at 12:10 p.m.
Unit I remained on line for the remainder of the reporting period.
Unit 2 Operations Unit 2 was placed on line at 4:03 a.m. on November 21, after having tripped from full power when 6900 volt switchgear 2TA was inadvertently deenergized causing a loss of flow in one reactor coolant system loop. Unit 2 remained on line for the remainder of the reporting period.
5.
Operations Management Meeting a.
Meeting Attendees Licensee Attendees H. Tucker Vice President, Nuclear Production T. McConnell Station Manager B. Travis Superintendent of Operations B. Hamilton Superintendent of Technical Services M. Sample Superintendent of Integrated Scheduling N. McCraw Compliance Engineer R. Gill Nuclear Engineer W. Rutherford System Engineer, Licensee Section NRC Attendees M. Ernst Deputy Regional Administrator V. Brownlee Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 2 W. Orders Senior Resident Inspector S. Guenther Resident Inspector J. Youngblood Director, Project Directorate #4 V. Benaroya Chief, Facility Operations Branch D. Hood Project Manager D. Tondi Special and Standardization Project
,
Directorate
-... -
- -.
.,,
.-. -.-.
.
.
..,_ _
- _
- - _
- - _ _.
, _,
.-
__
...
b.
Meeting Summary A management meeting was held on December 11, 1986, at - the NRC's request, to discuss Duke Power Company's (DPC) program to improve plant performance in the operations area since' receiving "back-to-back" Category 3 evaluations in plant operations on two successive SALP (Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance) reports.
Licensee representatives discussed several operations performance enhancements, such as:
maintaining a licensed operator staff considerably larger than
-
required by the plant's Technical Specifications; upgrading the level of control room professionalism;
-
implementing an employee training and qualification system (ETQS)
-
and adding a fourth assistant shift supervisor to each shift responsible for operator qualification; improving operator guidance in making equipment operability
-
determinations;
~
upgrading operating, emergency, and instrumentation and electrical
-
procedures; increasing management involvement in procedural compliance; innd
-
implementing a qualified reviewer training program.
-
Licensee representatives also discussed performance indicator, enforcement and licensee event report (LER) trends at McGuire during and since the previous SALP periods.
The discussions concerning SALP performance in the operations area proved beneficial to both the NRC and DPC by improving their mutual understanding of operating issues at the McGuire facility.
Subsequent to the licensee's SALP presentations, additional discussions were held to clarify the NRC's understanding of issues surrounding the operation of the nuclear service water (RN) system at McGuire. These issues had been previously discussed during an enforcement conference conducted in the Region II office on December 8,1986, however, some NRC concerns regarding the operation of shared portions of the RN system remained unresolved.
The licensee's RN presentation on December 11 indicated that, with the exception of ORN-1, which is normally open with power removed, all shared RN valves receive emergency power from two essential motor control centers (IEMXH and 2EMXH).
1EMXH can be powered from either
_ _ -
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _.
_
_
- _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. - _ _ _ _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_
_
~
o..
the Unit 1 or Unit 2
"A" train emergency diesel generator (EDG), while 2EMXH can be powered from either the Unit 1 or Unit 2 "B" train EDG.
In the event that either of the "A"/"B" train EDGs is inoperable, the IEMXH/2EMXH power source is switched to the operable EDG.
On December 12, the inspectors attempted to verify the presence of administrative controls to ensure the continuity of emergency power supplies to IEMXH and 2EMXH as described during the previous day's meeting.
Discussions with an on-duty senior reactor operator (SRO)
and licensee management indicated that no such administrative controls were known to exist. The fact that the affected motor control centers would have to be transferred from one unit to the other under dead-bus (i.e., nonroutine) conditions and the fact that a licensed SRO could not recall having performed such transfers in the past, raises concerns that the required power transfers were not being performed as described during the December 11 meeting. These concerns will be tracked as an Unresolved Item (UNR 369,370/86-38-01) pending further investigation by the resident and regional staff.
6.
Surveillance Testing Selected surveillance tests were analyzed and/or witnessed by the inspector to ascertain procedural and performance adequacy and.conformance with applicable Technical Specifications.
Selected tests were witnessed to ascertain that current written approved procedures were available and in use, that test equipment in use was calibrated, that test prerequisites were met, system restoration completed and test results were adequate.
7.
Maintenance Observations Routine maintenance activities were reviewed and/or witnessed by the resident inspection staff to ascertain procedural and performance adequacy and conformance with applicable Technical Specifications.
The selected activities witnessed were examined to ascertain that, where applicable, current written approved procedures were available and in use, that prerequisites were met, equipment restoration completed and maintenance results were adequate.