ML19322A745
| ML19322A745 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1972 |
| From: | Moseley N, Murphy C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322A740 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-72-05, 50-269-72-5, 50-270-72-04, 50-270-72-4, NUDOCS 7911210774 | |
| Download: ML19322A745 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000269/1972005
Text
. - .
-_ -___ __________-
me?-
.
.
.
- e
UNITED STATES
r^ f
t
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
l*
I
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE
1 1
.
REGION 11 - SulT E 818
230 PE ACHT REE ST REET. NORT HWEST
,
AT L. A NT A. GEORGI A 30303
RO Inspection Report.Nos. 50-269/72-5 and 50-270/72-4
Subj ect : Duke Power Company
Oconee 1 and 2
License Nos. CPPR-33 and 34
Location: Oconee County
Priority
Category A3/B1, A3/B1
Type of Licensee:. . PWR-2452 Mw(t), B&W
Type of Inspection: Routina, Unannounced
Dates of Inspection:. May 16-19, 1972
Dates of Previous Inspection: April 18-21, 1972
Principal Inspector: [
4 9hk
_ , .
C. E. Murph;r,16ac@ Inspector
Dale '
(Testing.and Startup Unit)
Accompanying Inspectors: None
Other Accompany g Personnel: None
d//fh6
Reviewed By:' A /[/,/
r
_ N."I:.'~Mosefeg Se g r. Reactor Inspector
Date'
,
/ (Testing Mid Startup Unit)
l
Proprietary Infor=ation: None
>
'
l
-
t
I
l
^
\\
s
7 911210 7 7y
j
_
.
.
.
.
O
RO Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-2-
and 50-270/72-4
SECTION I
Enforcement Action
None
Licensee Action on Previously Identified' Enforcement Matters
1.
The licensee's initial response to the items of noncompliance
identified in R0 Report Nos. 50-269/71-9, 50-269/71-10, and
50-269/71-11 was not considered to be satisfactory. DPC has
been granted a 30-day extension in which to send a supplemental
response.
2.
The licensee's response to the items of noncompliance identified
in RO Report Nos. 50-269/72-2, 50-270/72-1, and 50-207/72-1 was
not considered to be satisfactory. DPC by telecon agreed to issue
a supplemental response within two weeks.
Unresolved Items
1.
Procedure for the control of tools and small parts in the steam
generators.
(See Section II, paragraph 4)
2.
Quality Assurance audits of B&W Construction Company by DPC.
(See Section II, paragraph 4)
3.
Control of isometric drawings used for velding QC documentation.
(See Section II, paragraph 6)
4.
Revision to Work Order System procedures.
(See Section II,
paragraph 5)
5.
Upgrading shift supervisor's log.
(See Section II, paragraph 5)
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items
I
1.
Work is in progress to determine the tests which must be repeated
as a result of the component failures in the reactor coolant system.1/
1/ R0 Report No. 50-269/72-4
l
N
.
.
.
.
,
"N
R0 Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-3-
and 50-270/72-4
Correction of plant security deficiencies has not been completed.1/
2.
DPChasnotasyetmadeanauditofB&W'sQAprogramforthgjrepairs
1
3.
and modifications to the reactor coolant system components.--
4.
The licensee does not plan to conduct a pseudo-rod ejection
test at high power or a plant shutdown from outside the control
room.2/
Unusual Occurrences
None
Persons Contacted
,
'
Duke
.
- J. E. Smith - Plant Superintendent
- J. W. Hampton - Assistant Superintendent
R. M. Koehler - Technical Support Engineer
R. L. Wilson - Performance Engineer
- D. G. Beam - Construction Manager
- D.
L. Freeze - Principal Field Engineer
R. E. Llaisdell - Field Engineer, Welding and NDT
J. M. Curtis - Quality Assurance Supervisor, Engineering
- R. E. Miller - Mechanical Engineer, Design
- S. Blackley - Principal Mechanical Engineer, Design
H. Thielsch - Consultant
- Attended management interview
- By telephone
Management Interview
A management interview was held on May 19, 1972 and the following items
were discussed:
1. Faasse confirmed the inspector's understanding that B&W would
developed a procedure for the control of small parts and tools
during the repairs to the steam generators. He also agreed
that the general repair procedure for the Oconee Unit 1 steam
generator "A" would be revised to reflect the inspector's comments.
'
(See Section II, paragraph 4)
!
1/ R0 Report No. 50-269/72-4
.
2/ TO Report No. 50-269/71-4
!
-
-
__.
,
,
,- .
. - .
.,
-.
.
.
.
(D
R0 Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-4-
and 50-270/72-4
2.
Smith agreed that DPC would audit the B&W Quality Assurance
Program for the repair and modification of the reactor coolant
system.
(See Section II, paragraph 4)
3.
Smith stated that the shift supervisor's log would be upgraded
to reflect the inspector's comments. This work will be completed
in approximately one month.
(See Section II, paragraph 5)
4.
Beam confirmed that isometric drawings used by construction will
be controlled by the document control procedure. Work necessary
to accomplish this will be completed within a month.
(See
Section II, paragraph 6)
.
_
w
- *
<
_
._
_____
1
..
.
A
R0 Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-5-
and 50-270/72-4
SECTION II
Prepared By:
C. E. Murphy, Reactor
Inspector (Testing
and Startup Unit)
ADDITIONAL SUBJECTS INSPECTED, NOT IDENTIFIED IN SECTION I, WHERE NO
DEFICIENCIES CR UNRESOLVED ITEMS WERE FOUND
1.
Repairs to Unit 1 Steam Cenerator A
B&W is preparing a full scale mock-up of t>e steam generator upper
head and tube sheet. Each weldor will take 1.is qualification
test on the mock-up. The test will require making ten tube to tube
sheet welds. The test pieces will be sectioned and penetrant
tested at twenty points. No indications will be permitted on the
test pieces.
2.
Unit 2 Main Steam Piping
The inspector reviewed the NDT records relating to welds Nos.
4-19 and 4-31- of the Unit 2 main steam piping. No deficiencies
were observed.
3.
Plant Schedule
DPC hopes to be able to establish a schedule for the fuel loading
for all three units within the coming week.
(At a meeting on
May 24, 1972, the inspector was advised that Unit 1 fuel would
be loaded starting December 1, 1972, and Unit 2 fuel would be
i
loaded starting January 1, 1973. Unit 3 would follow Unit 2 by
'
one year. These schedules are based upon the modifications to
the reactor coolant system components being ecmpleted without
unanticipated delays and the methods being acceptable to the
AEC.)
DETAILS OF SUBJECTS DISCUSSED IN SECTION I
4.
Repairs and Modification to the Reactor Coolant Systems
The inspector reviewed the Quality Assurance Program being developed
by B&W for the repairs and modifications to the three reactor
coolant systems. Faasse advised the inspector that the procedures
for the program were not completed at the time, but he could outline
.
l
L
!
!
_
.
.
D.
RO Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-6-
and 50-270/72-4
the details of the program as it was presently planned. One weakness
noted by the inspector was that B&W did not plan to have a procedure
for the control of small tools and parts. At one point in the
repair of the Unit 1 steam generator A (OTSG A) such a procedure
is extremely important since the secondary side of the tubes of
the OTSG A will be open to the primary side. Recovery of parts
dropped through these openings would be extremely difficult to
recover from the tube bundle area. Faasse agreed to develop a
procedure for the control of small tools and parts for use when
working in the steam generators.
The inspector also reviewed the " General Repair Procedure, Oconee 1,
OTSG A" dated April 21, 1972. Although this procedure had been
revised after this date there was no mechanism for determining
the revision number in use.
In addition the procedure did not
require a final penetranc test after welding. Faasee agreed to
correct these weaknesses.
The inspector expressed concern to Curtis that work was proceeding
on the repairs to the Unit 1 components, apparently without a
,
complete QA program. Curtis advised the inspector that although
DPC had not audited the B&W QA program, that such an audit would
be made within a month.
These items were discussed in the management interview and the in-
spector plans to review the progress made during the next inspection.
5.
Plant Logs
As a followup to the previous inspection, the inspector reviewed
the Shift Supervisor's Log, the Control Room Log, and the Work
Order Log. No progress had been made in upgrading the Shif t.
Supervisor's Log since the last inspection.
Smith advised the
inspector, however, that a Standing. Order (S0) was being prepared
that would establish requirements for.the Shift Supervisor's Log.
He stated that the S0 would be in effect within one month and
that the inspector'a previous comments would be incorporated.
In discussions with Hampton regarding the Station Work Orders.
Hampton agreed that the system was weak in that the possible
need for testing after completion of the work was not identified.
.
-
t
%
R0 Report Nos. 50-269/72-5
-7-
and 50-270/72-4
He and Smith agreed that when a Work Order request is approved,
the test requirements, if any, would be identified on the form.
Work would not be considered complete until the testing had been
accomplished.
These items were discussed in the management interview and the
inspector will review them during a future inspection.
6.
Isometric Drawings
During the review of the nondestructive test records relating
to the Unit 2 main steam piping, the inspector questioned Blaisdell
as to how his group knew to inspect a weld. Blaisdell stated
that the Mechanical Piping Section prepared isometric drawings
showing the location of each weld. Wald QC check lists were then
made up for each weld shown on the isometric and as required by
the type weld required. Typically these would include Form QC-37,
Heat Treating Records; QC-30, Radiographic Inspection Report;
Form QC-36, Field Weld Checkoff List. The inspector asked Blaisdell
if a mechanism existed to assure that his inspectors had the
latest revisions to the isometric drawings. Blaisdell answered
negatively stating that the isometrics were not covered by the
document control procedure. The inspector questioned Beam and
Freeze concerning the handling of revisions to the isometric
drawings and both agreed that the isometrics would be brought
under the document control procedure.
This item was discussed in the management interview and Beam
confirmed the agreement. The inspector plans to review the
progress during the next inspection.
l
l
t
l
I
- - -
.
._ .
-
...
..
- - .
. . . - .
-
.-
-
.
.,
-
.
. , ,
,
-
p
.
.
-
1
Ltr to Duke Power Company
dtd 6/21/72
,
J
i
DISTRI JTION:
'
'J. B. Fenderson, RO
"
J. G. keppler, RO
RO Office of Oparat ons Evaluation
.,
RO AD for Inspection & Enforcement
L, DD for Reactor Projects
RO Files
DR Central Files
Local PDR
DTIE
i
!
'
.
I
e
e
!
l
I
~
i.
%
J
l
f
-
s
.
.---r,-
%
+
-
-en
,
- . , ,=, y .- -
e-e 4
_-
4-