ML16148A780
| ML16148A780 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1993 |
| From: | Branch M, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16148A779 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-93-12, 50-270-93-12, 50-287-93-12, NUDOCS 9305180261 | |
| Download: ML16148A780 (12) | |
See also: IR 05000269/1993012
Text
t REGO4
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323
Report Nos.: 50-269/93-12, 50-270/93-12 and 50-287/93-12
Licensee: Duke Power Company
P.O. Box 1007
Charlotte, N.C.
28201-1007
Docket Nos.:
50-269, 50-270
and 50-287
and DPR-55
Facility Name:
Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3
Inspection Conducted: April 12-16, 1993
Inspector:
__ _ _ _ __
_ _
H. L. Whitener
)Date
igned
Reactor Inspector
Accompanying Inspectors: M. D. Hunt
M. N. Miller
Approved by:
M. W. Branch, Chief
Date
igned
Test Program Section
Engineering Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted onsite in the areas of
configuration control and engineering support activities.
9305180261 930510
PDR ADOCK 05000269
0
2
Results:
In the areas examined the inspectors determined that the licensee has a strong
technical support staff of knowledgeable and experienced engineers.
The licensee implements an effective minor modifications program that allows
corrective action to be taken in a timely manner.
In the area of configuration control one violation was identified.
Violation:
Failure to Properly Maintain Drawing Changes in the Control Room,
(paragraph 4).
Strength:
The System and Component Engineering groups are well staffed with a large
group of knowledgeable experienced engineers.
REPORT DETAILS
1. Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
H. Barron, Manager, Oconee Station
T. Coutu, Manager, Support Operations
- D. Coyle, Manager, System Engineering
- W. Foster, Superintendent, Mechanical Maintenance
D. Garland, System Engineer
D. Hendricks, Administrative Specialist
- D. Hubbard, Manager, Component Engineering
D. Kelly, Instructor, Training
J. Lee, Production Specialist, Operations
B. Loftis, Supervisor, Comp 'onent Engineering
K. Louvin, System Engineer
W. McAlister, Supervisor, Component Engineering
- M. Patrick, Manager, Regulatory Compliance
J. Peebles, Supervisor, Document Management
- B. Peele, Manager, Site Engineering
- S. Perry, Specialist, Regulatory Compliance,
- G. Rothenberger, Superintendent, Operations
T. Royal, Supervisor, Component Engineering
L. Staggeus, Assistant, Document Control
C. Tompkins, Supervisor, Component Engineering
H.
Weir, Component Engineering Supervisor
- L. Wilkie, Manager, Training
Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, engineers,
operators, and administrative personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
B. Desai, Resident Inspector
K. Poertner, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview on April 15, 1993.
- Attended exit interview on April 16, 1993.
Acronyms and Initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the
last paragraph.
2.
Technical Support
The inspectors reviewed the activities of the three station groups
providing engineering technical support to plant maintenance and
operations. The three groups include OSES in the Operations Department;
and SES and CES in the site Engineering organization. The review
focused on engineering involvement in the identification and resolution
of problems.
2
A.
Operations Support Engineering
A review of OSES was conducted to determine the duties assigned to
these personnel.
These OSES personnel are SRO licensed and
perform duties as shift supervisors from time to time as required
by.requalification training requirements. Additionally, they
serve as the interface between operations and the other
engineering groups during the resolution of day-to-day problems at
the Plant. They also perform testing of components, develop
various programs, review valve line ups for tests, and verify
system interfaces related to tests. OSE also insures that shift
personnel are adequately informed of station modifications, design
changes, significant operating events at other utilities, and any
other information to enhance nuclear safety.
The inspectors interviewed one operations engineer and his
supervisor regarding the duties performed and the qualifications
required for the tasks assigned. Both were knowledgeable and
appeared adequately trained for their work assignments.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
B.
System Engineering
The SES is a part of the Site Engineering Organization. This
section is staffed with 22 experienced engineers from the former
Projects or Performance Groups. Their responsibilities include
approximately 70 systems. At Oconee many of the traditional
activities of a SE in support of plant operations and maintenance,
particularly related to generic activities such as pumps, valves,
IST, etc., are assigned to CEs (see paragraph 2.C).
The function
of the SE is to manage activities related to the assigned system
to maximize the performance, availability, and reliability of the
system. This involves maintaining an overview of all activities
related to the system. Also, as the technical expert for a
system, the SE provides technical input to support major
modifications, initiates minor modifications, evaluates test data
for adequate system performance, and participates in problem
resolutions to ensure a system meets required design function.
The PIP program is the method through which most station problems
are reported. The identified problems are screened by the PIP
coordinator. The problems are then reviewed by the Safety Review
Group who validate the significance and decide if an event is
reportable and if an operability determination is required.
Through. this review process, resolution of a problem is assigned
to a specific group and person, frequently the SE. The inspectors
reviewed the problem investigation data base in order to ascertain
SES involvement in identifying and resolving station problems.
From the PIP Summary List it was found that in the year
April 1992, through April 1993, 69 PIPs were originated by SES.
From the Problem Investigation Report Resolutions data base, of 70
3
problem resolutions assigned to SES and CES since February 1992,
16 were assigned to SES, indicating involvment in problem
resolution.
The inspectors also reviewed the SEs annual system report for the
Emergency Feedwater and Ventilation System. These reports provide
details of system problems, system major and minor modifications,
resolved issues, outstanding issues, test performance, special
tests and system availability. Recommendations of needed system
improvements are included in the reports. These reports also
address the team concept used by the licensee. Although the SE.is
responsible for system performance, problem resolution is often a.
result of multiple group input coordinated by the SE to bring the
best available expertise to focus on a problem. The inspectors
tracked portions of the engineering response to the failure of the
control room ventilation system to achieve a positive pressure in
the control room relative to the atmosphere. The subsequent
investigation resulted in identification of degraded equipment and
plant modifications or maintenance to effect repair; additional
control room sealing; inspection of ductwork and dampers resulting
in near team and long term plant modification; and identification
of a sensitivity of the control room pressure to the ABVS
configuration. A special test procedure was developed and
extensive testing performed to define the acceptable
configurations of the ABVS. This data was analyzed and provided
to operations.
The inspector concluded that the SES is adequately staffed with
knowledgeable engineers who assume ownership of their systems,
actively participate in identifying and resolving system technical
issues, and respond to engineering technical issues in support of
systems operation.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
C.
Component Engineering
The CES is part of the site engineering organization. Previously,
CES was the Maintenance Engineering group and was in the
maintenance department. The group's main function of providing
support to the maintenance department has not changed.
CES has the programmatic lead in the technical support program for
generic components and programs. For example, valves are generic
components and there are several valve programs such as the
"check valve program" and the "motor operated valve program". In
addition to components, CES also has responsibility for
structures, inspection activities, and testing. The CES
Instrument and Electrical Section has system responsibility for
most of the I&C systems. The CES is also responsible for
4
initiating minor modifications, temporary modifications, test
procedures, maintenance procedures, and issuing yearly technical
reports (self assessment) for each of their activities.
CES has a total of 65 technical personnel assigned in four
sections.
Each section has an engineering supervisor except the
Instrument and Electrical Section which has two supervisors. The
inspectors examined each section to determine its function and
staffing requirements. In addition, the inspectors verified that
each section was performing its assigned duties. This
verification was performed by reviewing lists and work packages of
minor modifications completed during the last outage and the minor
modifications prepared for the up coming outage. The work
history for each component was stored in a comprehensive computer
data base. This work history data base was also used for
trending. The inspectors reviewed the components and areas of
responsibility for each of the sections to verify that the
Component Engineering program was being satisfactorily implemented
in a timely manner. The areas of responsibility for the four
sections are listed as follows:
Mechanical I (ten personnel) - diesels, heat exchangers,
piping, hangers, snubbers, HVAC, tendons, metallurgical
welding, inservice inspections, hydro, erosion/corrosion
program, welding program, code issues, and lead shielding.
In addition to the general review, the inspectors examined
the following items:
Lead Shielding Maintenance Directive 74.1 dated
December 11, 1991 for the temporary installation and
removal of lead shielding.
Tendon Inspection MP/O/A/1400/022 dated July 1, 1992
and the Unit 1 Tendon Report dated February 1, 1993.
Hydrostatic Test MP/O/A/1720/010 dated November 12,
1992.
Piping Pneumatic Test MP/O/A/1720/015 dated July 15,
1992.
Hydro layout drawings for the up coming Unit 2 outage.
Mechanical Section II (twelve personnel) - coatings, pumps,
compressors, motors, seals, hydrogen recombiners, balancing,
hatches, civil/civil inspections, fire protection, infrared
thermography, lubrication, oil analysis, vibration analysis,
predictive maintenance, and civil integrated leak rate
testing,. In addition to the general review, the inspectors
examined the following items:
5
Predictive maintenance PM-2 program for lubrication,
oil analysis, vibration, infrared, balancing, and the
1992 PM-2 Report dated February 25, 1992.
PM-2 computer program, Mastertrend V2.62, and the
trending results for oil, motor current, vibration,
fault history, infrared, and balancing.
Mechanical/I&E Section (twelve plus two contractor
personnel) - all types of valves, all types of valve
operators, positioners, valve limit switches, Limitorque
operators, regulators, steam traps, cranes, heat trace, AC
low voltage systems and breakers, check valve program, and
the motor operated valve program. In addition to the
general review, the inspectors examined the following items:
Check valve program and computer work history.
Motor operated valve program for GL 89-10.
CFARs (Component Failure Analysis Reports).
Instrument and Electrical Section (28 personnel) - all
instrumentation; 4160 and 6900 V switchgear; 600 V metal
clad switchgear; auxiliary power; most electrical systems;
all I&C systems; calibrations; procedures for electrical and
I&C; all types of instruments such as temperature/pressure,
and level transmitters; and setpoint documents. The
inspectors reviewed several completed minor modifications
and planned minor modifications for the up coming Unit 2
outage.
The inspectors concluded that CES was a well managed group containing
knowledgeable experienced engineers and technicians. CES performs a
needed and valuable service supporting the plant and the maintenance
department with their expertise in components, systems, and dedicated
programs. CES allows generic problems across system boundaries to be
identified and corrected in a timely manner.
3.
Modifications
There are three types of modifications performed, minor, major and
temporary. Major modifications are only performed by Design
Engineering. Technical support performs the minor and temporary
modifications and most of these modifications are performed by CES.
The inspectors reviewed the governing procedures; Site Directive 2.2.1
Control of Minor Modifications, and Site Directive 2.1.4 Control of
Temporary Modifications to determine their requirements and
applicability for supporting plant activities and changes.
Minor modifications are limited in scope, involving minor additions,
deletions or changes to equipment. General guidelines are that minor
modifications do not involve complex design calculations, are of a
6
single discipline, and are limited to a single component or similar
components in the same system. The inspectors verified that the
licensee's program requires a safety evaluation to meet the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.59, a post modification test, and drawing updates.
Temporary modifications are changes to a structure, system or component
that are normally limited to 18 months or less. Temporary modifications
include lifting and reconnecting electrical leads; and installation and
removal of electrical jumpers, blind/blank flanges, spool pieces,
valves, temporary hoses or piping, and temporary electrical power.' The
inspectors verified that a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation, a post
modification test, and a listing of updated drawings were required by
the governing procedures.
The inspectors reviewed a list of 751 minor and temporary modifications
for all three units that were initiated since January 1991, to verify
that technical support was involved in correcting plant problems. This
list had a description of each modification. The inspectors examined
108 completed Unit 1 minor modifications for valve replacements and
portions of 196 up coming Unit 2 valve.replacements to verify the
packages included a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation, required post
modification test, and a list of drawings to be updated. In addition,
the Minor Modifications Activity Report dated April 8, 1993, was
reviewed to follow up on valve replacements for both past and future
outages for all three units.
The inspectors conducted walkdown inspections of the following minor and
temporary modifications to verify the installations were in accordance
with the drawings and the requirements specified in the work packages:
Unit 1
TSM-0055
Disable R1A-31 flow alarm by adding jumper
Unit 2
TSM-1038
Disconnect RTD 2RD43B input in ICCM Train
B. Connect RTD 2RD43C to provide ICCM
with pressurizer temperature input.
Unit 3
TSM-0934
Open link 7 of row' B in 3MTC3 terminal
labeled on drawing 3LS29. This will
defeat the fuel weir pool interlock and
allow pumps to run.
0III
7
Minor Modifications
Unit 1
OE-4284
Revise spent fuel.pool level instrument to
allow temporary modification ONTM-730 to
be removed. Instrument procedure affected
IP/0/B/220/1G.
Unit 2
OE-4073
Replace post accident RB pressure
transmitters 2PT230 and 2PT231 per EQ
required change out. Procedures affected
IP/0/A/150/1H and 11.
Unit 3.
OE-4500
Replace indicator and square root
extractor for HPI crossover flow.
Procedure affected IP/0/A/202/1D.
Unit 1
OE-4231
Add snubber on 24" main feedwater and
modify S/R 1-03A-1-0-439A-H25 and 1-03A-1
0-439A-SR39 on 6" emergency feedwater
piping.
Unit 2
OE-4209
Add snubber on 24" main feedwater piping
and on 6" emergency feedwater piping.
Modify S/R 2-03A-1401A-DE033 from snubber
to rigid restraint. Delete S/R 2-03A01-0
1401A-SR50.
Unit .1
OE-5207
Replace 1LPSW-687 with item No. DMV-852.
Unit 1
OE-5225
Add vent valve 1CCW-422.
Unit 1
OE-5386
Relocate 1C-850 to vertical run.
Unit 1
OE-5387
Relocate 1C-852 to vertical run.
The inspectors verified that the above modifications were installed in
accordance with the required procedures/drawings. The inspectors
concluded that the licensee has a good program for minor and temporary
modifications. The inspectors also concluded that CES does an
effective job of supporting maintenance by identifying, tracking, and
resolving problems. This was evidenced by the large number of timely
modifications issued to correct plant problems.
4.
Drawing Configuration Control
The inspectors examined the drawing control process to evaluate the
issuance of drawing changes that reflect various plant changes and
modifications. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the
licensee's methods for assuring that the various site organizations were
in possession of the latest issue of controlled drawings reflecting the
as built plant.
8
All change notices and revised drawings are issued from the document
control center. Distribution is designated by predetermined distri
bution lists. The specific distribution lists to be used by document
control is determined by the group responsible for issuing the drawing
revision or change notice.
The inspectors noted that there was no receipt acknowledgement required
by the document control center to verify that the designated group
received the drawing transmittal.
Discussions with various personnel
involved in the issuance and receipt of drawing transmittals, indicated
that an informal method of receipt verification had existed for a long
time. No official drawing receipt verification exists. Various
personnel interviewed informed the inspectors that no problems had
arisen using the informal system of distribution control. A formal
receipt of documents is a more positive method of controlling documents
and insuring that the proper groups receive the documents issued.
Licensee management indicated that the need for a formal receipt program
would be reviewed and appropriate actions taken.
The inspectors reviewed control room drawings to verify that information
existed that reflected the latest and current plant configuration.
Drawings were selected which had been stamped indicating that a change
existed against the drawings These changes were identified by an OE
number. The OE number indicated that information such as drawings or
sketches covering changes against the drawing were on file in the
control room, but had not yet been incorporated into the drawing. The
following drawings with the OE changes as indicated were reviewed:
Drawing #
OE Change #
OFD 100A- 1.1
- OE-
2307
OFD 100A- 3.1
OE- 4369, & 4370
OFD 122A- 1.1
- OE-
2240, & *2229
OFD 122A- 1.3
- OE- 2240, & *2229
OFD 122A- 1.4
- OE-
2241, & *2257
OFD 101A- 2.3
- OE-
4344
OFD 1OA- 2.4
OE- 2538
OFD 1O1A- 3.1
OE- 4841
OFD 101A- 3.4
OE- 4796, 4932, & 4906
Those OE change numbers preceded by an asterisk were missing from the
Unit 1 control room files. The same changes were found missing from the
Unit 2 control room files. The licensee advised the inspectors that the
same situation existed for Unit 3. The licensee initiate actions to
review all control room drawings to determine the extent of the
condition identified by the inspectors.
On April 14, 1993, five of nine Unit 1 control room drawings examined by
the inspectors were found to have the drawing/sketches for the changes
identified on these drawings missing from the files.
9
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion VI requires that measures be
established for control of the distribution and use of drawings and
changes there to. The Duke Power Company Quality Assurance Program
Topical Report requires that such documents are maintained and utilized,
as appropriate, in the performance of quality related activities at each
nuclear station. At Oconee these requirements are implemented, in part,
by Operations Management Procedure 1-15, Revision 3, paragraph 5.1 which
requires that changes to a controlled drawing be maintained on file
until the controlled drawing is updated.
At the exit interviews, the inspectors identified the failure to
maintain changes to controlled drawings on file as Violation 50-269,
270, 287\\93-12-01.
The inspector noted that the drawings were protected in covers to
prevent deterioration during use and handling. These drawing were
readable and well maintained.
5.
Training
The training requirements for Accredited Manager and Technical Staff are
provided in Duke Power Company Standard #: 3001.0, Manager and Technical
Staff Training Program. This standard applies to Production Training
Services, Nuclear Production Department, and any other technical
personnel who support nuclear station technical work.
The program consists of initial training and continuing training topics
which provide the technical staff and management with knowledge and
skills required for their position. The initial or
Engineer/Professional training portion is applicable to new and in some
instances transferred employees. Management determines what portions of
the initial program can be bypassed. Additionally, SRO certification
training may be an acceptable substitute for the initial training.
The Engineer/Professional Program consists of the following topics:
Station Orientation
Basic Engineer/Professional
Nuclear Engineer
Engineer and Professional (ENPF) Systems
DPC Standard #: 3001.0 is designed to meet the guidelines of INPO 82-022, Technical Development for Technical Staff and Managers.
Personnel assigned to supervisory or management positions receive
additional training which is intended to be sufficient to fulfill the
guidelines given in the INPO Guidelines82-022 for managers.
Continuing training for managers and technical staff is determined by
the functional area assignment. A list of the required training topics
as well as training required on an "as needed" basis is maintained for
the assignment areas. The "as needed" training is component or system
oriented and is often given by selected vendors either on .or off site.
10
The inspectors reviewed the training records of four SEs and five CEs
for the period beginning January 1990, to the time of the inspection.
All of the nine records reviewed indicated that the individuals had
received/completed various technical studies along with certain site and
DPC specific training during the period.
The inspectors concluded that the training provided for the engineering
and technical support personnel is adequate. No weaknesses were
identified in this area. No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and results were summarized on April 15, 1993 and
April 16, 1993, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The
inspectors described the.areas inspected and discussed in detail the
findings. Proprietary information is not contained in this report. The
licensee was advised of the apparent violation identified during the
inspection and listed below. Dissenting comments were not received.from
the licensee.
Violation 50-269,270,287/93-12-01:
"Failure To Properly Maintain
Drawing Changes in the Control Room Files".
.
7. Acronyms and Initialisms
Auxiliary Building Ventilation System
Alternating Current
CE/s
Component Engineer/s
Component Engineering Section/Group
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CFAR
Component Failure Analysis Report
Duke Power Company
ENPF
Engineer and Professional
Environmental Qualification
GL
Generic Letter
High Pressure Injection
Instrument and Electrical
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Inservice Test
Maintenance Procedure
Minor Change or Modification
OSE/s
Operations Support Engineer/s
OSES
Operations Support Engineering Section/Group
Predictive Maintenance
Problem Investigation Process
Preventive Maintenance
Reactor Building
SE/s
System Engineer/s
SES
System Engineering Section/Group
Senior Reactor Operator
Temporary Site Modification
V
Volts