ML15251A148
| ML15251A148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1980 |
| From: | Conlon T, Hardwick R, Ruff A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15251A146 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-270-80-18, 50-287-80-16, IEB-79-01B, IEB-79-18, IEB-79-1B, NUDOCS 8008150216 | |
| Download: ML15251A148 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000270/1980018
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
Report Nos. 50-270/80-18 and 50-287/80-16
Licensee:
Duke Power Company
422 South Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28242
Facility Name:
Oconee Nuclear Station
Licensee Nos. DPR-47 and DPR-55
Inspection at Duke Power Company corporate offices, Charlotte, North Carolina
Inspectors:
7
R.
ardwick, Jr.
D te igned
A. B. Ruff
ae Sge
Approved b
ppK
,
-7 - 17 -F
T. E. Conlon
Date Signed
.
SUMMARY
Inspection on June 16-20, 1980
Areas Inspected
This special, announced inspection involved 62 inspector-hours onsite in the
area of document review with respect to IE Bulletin 79-01B response.
8008150 2AGw
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- J. R. Wells, Corp. QA Manager,
QA Department
- W. J. Foley, Jr., Principal Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- R. F. Johnston, Associate Engineer, Steam-Licensing Department
- T. P. Harrall, Assistant Design Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- W. M. Austin, Assistant Design Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- M. A. Susinno, Maintenance Engineer, Steam Production Department
- D. M. Clark, Senior Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- R. F. Wardell, Senior Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- K. R. Wilson, Assistant Engineer, Steam-Licensing Department
C. J. Wylie, Chief Engineer, Electrical Division
P. McBride, Assistant Design Engineer, Design Engineering Department
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 20,
1980 with
those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
IE Bulletin 79-01B
The inspectors examined documents pertaining to environmental qualifica
tion.
The examined documents were for instrumentation and components in
the Engineered Safeguards (ES)
and High Pressure Injection (HPI)
systems.
These documents were previously identified in the licensee's response to
IEB 79-01B and apply to instrumentation and components listed below. This
equipment is
located in the primary containment and was examined on a
previous inspection.
ENGINEERED SAFEGUARD SYSTEM
Pressure Transmitter No.
Cable No.
Electrical Penetration No.
2PT21P
2EMC649A
EC4
2PT22P
2EMC651A
WA1
-2
2PT23P
2EMC650A
EA13
3PT21P
3EMC1202A
EC4
3PT22P
3EMC1203A
WA1
3PT23P
3EMC1201A
EA13
HIGH PRESSURE INJECTION SYSTEM
Motor Operated Valves (MOVs)
Cable No.
Electrical Penetration No.
2HP3
2EXS21A
WD5
2HP4
2EXS21B
WD5
2HP20
2EXS23A
ED11
3HP3
3EMXS19A
WD5
3HP4
3EMXS19B
.WD5
3HP20
3EMXS21A
ED11
During review of this documentation,
it
was determined that additional
information is
needed for Oconee units'
2 and 3 pressure transmitters
(PT-21P,
22P and 23P),
and the cables associated with these transmitters
for Oconee unit 2.
The specific areas where additional information or
clarification is required are listed below.
It
should be noted that the
completion of outstanding items, identified in the licensee's IEB 79-01B
report, may resolve the need for additional information with regard to the
pressure transmitters. These outstanding items relate to operating times
following an accident and to radiation specifications.
For Pressure Transmitters:
a.
The demonstrated accuracy, as indicated on the licensee's IEB 79-01B
Evaluation Work Sheet, is valid over the first 20 seconds and following
the 400 second period of the harsh environment testing phase for
temperature, pressure, and humidity.
For the time period between 20
seconds and 400 seconds the demonstrated accurary is not within the
specified accurary range and no discussion or justification is provided
in the report.
b.
The licensee's IEB 79-0IB evaluation work sheets for pressure trans
mitters is in error. These sheets reference a document for radiation
qualification but the referenced document does not provide the required
information. Another document was provided by the licensee but it,
by
itself, was not traceable to the installed equipment.
3.
The model numbers on the transmitters that were obtained during the
plant inspection do not agree with the model numbers provided on the
licenee's IEB-79-01B Evaluation Work Sheet.
The model numbers on the
work sheet is for a basic unit.
It is considered that the basic unit
test would suffice for a type test for the installed units.
The
licensee agreed to contact the Vendor to insure that the installed
units are covered by a valid type test.
-3
Inspector Follow-up items for these transmitters are identified as
50-270/80-18-01
and 50-287/80-16-01,
Additional IEB 79-01B Environ
mental Qualification Data Required for Pressure Transmitters, PT-21P,
22P and 23P.
For Pressure Transmitters Cables 2EMC649A, 651A and 650A:
The qualification document referenced on the licensee's IEB 79-OB
Evaluation Work Sheet appeared to be more of a sales pamphlet rather
than a test qualification document.
This document did not completely
identify the test. The chemical spray was not addressed, radiation
qualification value determination was not evident, cables were not
energized during the test, the test profile for temperature, pressure
and humidity did not seem to relate to FSAR accident profiles. Also,
it
was difficult to correlate the Licensee's cable types to Vendor's
cable types.
Inspector Follow-up Item for these cables is identified as 50-270/
80-18-02,
"Additional
IEB 79-01B Environmental Qualification Data
Required for cables 2EMC649A,
651A and 650A and traceability from
Licensee's cable type to Vendor's cable types."
Within the areas examined, these were no items of noncompliance or deviations
identified.