ML20055H484

Insp Repts 50-369/90-14 & 50-370/90-14 on 900626-0705. Violations Noted.Major Areas inspected:licensee-identified Issues Re Unit 1 Diesel Generator Inoperability for Approx 26 H on 900625-26

ML20055H484
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	07/13/1990
From:	Cooper T, Shymlock M, Van Doorn P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20055H482	List: ML20055H481 ML20055H484
References
50-369-90-14, 50-370-90-14, NUDOCS 9007260266
Download: ML20055H484 (5)

See also: IR 05000369/1990014

Text

^

,, ,,

it t

kr'

' */ M -

... . . .

UNITEo STATES

"

, /gMooq#g.-

d

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N

[f

<

g

• h

e

REGigN il

.101 MARIETTA STREET.N.W.

ATLANYA.GEoROI A 30323

,

%.....$

4

Report Nos.: . 50-369/90-14 and 50-370/90-14

J 1.icensee: Duke Power Company

P. O. Box'1007

p Charlotte, NC 28201-1007

Facility Name: . McGuire Nuclear Station 1 and 2

Docket'No(s): 50-369.and 50-370 LicenseNo(s): HPF-9 and NPF-17

Inspection Conducted: June 1990 - July 5,_1990

Inspector: h-- 7

P. K. Van Door Dat~e 5 gned

Inspector:

T. Co per-

^ 7h

Datt Signed

O

/

Approved b ' k d[' 7//J/[o

-(M. B. Shymlock, Section Chief Dat'e Signed -

Division of Reactor Pr.)jects-  ;

SUMMARY

Scope:

This special resider.t inspection-was conducted on site inspecting ~in the areas

of-licensee identified issues involving Unit I diesel generator inoperability

'

for approximately 26 hours3.009259e-4 days <br />0.00722 hours <br />4.298942e-5 weeks <br />9.893e-6 months <br /> on June 25-26, 1990.

.

Results:

'

'

In._the areas inspected, two apparent violations were identified for consideration

-

. -for escalated enforcement. One violation involved both Unit I diesel generators ,

not being able to meet Technical Specification (TS) requirements due to painting

-

of the fuel racks. 1::e second violation involved nonconservative TS equipment-

-

logging of diesel generator inoperability.

, e

'd'

'1L

i

9007260266 900713

{DR ADOCK 03000369 i

PDC '

-.

^

. _ _ _

+

s.  ;

'

'

. .

4

I

i

REPORT DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted

i

Licensee Employees

,

• J. Boyle, Superintendent of Integrated Scheduling ,

• D. Bumgardner, Unit 1 Operations Manager

• D. Franks, QA Verification Manager

• C. Hendrix, Maintenance Engineering Services Manager

• F. Krauss QA Audit _ Division

• T. Mathews, Site Design Engineering Manager '

• T. McConnell, Plant Manager

• T. Pederson, Compliance

• J. Reeside, McGuire Safety Review Group

R. Rider, Mechanical Maintenance Engineer

M. Sample, Superintendent of Maintenance '

• R. Sharpe, Compliance Manager ,

• J. Silver, Unit 2 Operations Manager

A. Sipe, McGuire Safety Review Group Chairman

• G. Small, McGuire Safety Review Group

• K. Thomas, Design Electrical Division

• B. Travis, Superintendent of Operations

Other licensee _ employees contacted included craftsmen, technicians,

operators, and office personnel.

• Attended exit interview

2. Unit 1 Diesel Generator Inoperability

a. Background

The lict.nsee has provided two separate and independent diesel

generators (DGs) to meet 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, Criterion 17 require-

ments for an assured on-site source of electrical power for safe

shutdown of the reactor, containment isolation, containment spray and s

cooling, and emergency core cooling following an accident. The DGs

are rated at 4,000 kilowatts (kw) for continuous operation with

capacity to operate at 4,400 kw for a period of two hours out of 24

hours. The DG design basis is reflected in Technical Specification (TS) 4.8.1.1.2 which requires each DG to be tested on a staggered

test basis to verify that the DG starts from ambient condition and

'

accelerates to at least 488 revolutions per minute (rpm) in less than

or equal to 11 seconds, and that the generator voltage and frequency

are at least 4,160 volts and 57 Uz within 11 seconds. The TS also

requires the DG to be synchronized and loaded to 3,000 kw in less

than or equal to 60 seconds, and to 4,000 kw within 10 minutes.

Unit 1 DGs 1A and IB were on a monthly testing frequency at the time

of this event.

.. . . . .

"

A , i

V )

,

a- ,

• 1'

~

-

j

. .-

. 2

b. Event Description

In an effort to ' upgrade plant housekeeping and appearance, the

licensee has been. repainting various areas and equipment. On June 22,

1990, the licensee. began painting DG 1A and completed the painting at

approximately 3:00 p.m., on June 23, 1990.- On June 23, 1990 the

licensee began painting on DG 18 and completed at approximately 11:00-

a.m., on June 25, 1990. Portions of the DG fuel racks were painted *

near the end of the painting period. On June 26, 1990 the routine

periodic test-for DG 1A became due. The test was initiated at 9:05

';

a.m. At this time, the DG attained the required voltage (4160 volts)

in 11.35 seconds in lieu of the required 11 seconds. The DG was

shutdown for troubleshooting. Some arcing was noted- during the

operation at the exciter commutator rings and upon shutdown the

licensee noted.some paint overspray on the rings. Thiswasoriginal(  :

thought to have contributed to the problem, however, the majority of

the overspray had been burned off during the diesel start. DG 1A was

declared inoperable at 10:00 a.m. A second start of DG 1A was

commenced at 10:06 a.m. During this test, the licensee was only able

to load the DG to 3,200 kw. Repeated cycling of the engine allowed

loading to a marimum of 3,500 kw.

Further review disclosed that the overspray on the commutator rings

probably had little detrimental effect on the DG, and that the primary

problem was the paint on the fuel racks which prevented proper ,

functioning of linkage and injector pump plungers which operate to

,

vary the amount of fuel being injected into the cylinders. At

l approximately 11:00 a.m., the licensee also noted paint on the DG 1B  ;

fuel racks and _ noted that most of one of the two cylinder banks was

sticking upon attempted manual movement.

i

The licensee declared DG IB inoperable at 11:34 a.m. and entered 1

TS 3.8.1.1.f for two DGs inoperable. This TS requires that the j

licensee begin shutting down the plant within two hours if one DG

is not returned to operable status. Tne licensee cleared and freed

fuel racks; on DG 1B, then completed cleaning of DG 1A and began

testing DG 1A at' 11:37 a.m. DG 1A was declared operable at 1:25

p.m., after a successful test. The event was reported to the NRC at

- 2:03 p.m. DG IB was declared operable at 4:00 p.m. after cleaning

and a successful test. Unit I remained at 100 percent power the

entire time period.

DG 1A DG 1B

Painting Completed 6/23, 3:00 p.m. 6/25, 11:00 a.m.

Fuel Rack Binding 6/26, 9:20 a.m. 6/26, 11:00 a.m.

Confirmed .

,

Declared Inoperable 6/26, 10:00 a.m. 6/26, 11:34 a.m.

Returned to Service 6/26, 1:25 p.m. 6/26, 4:00 p.m.

I

>

.

,

'

.

.

.- 3

L The time wh'ich elapsed from completion of painting both DGs to

o declaring DG 1A operable, during which both engines were simultaneously

'

inoperable, was 26 hours3.009259e-4 days <br />0.00722 hours <br />4.298942e-5 weeks <br />9.893e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutes. While it would appear

appropriate to allow some time to be assumed for paint drying, it

appears that both DGs were unable to meet TS requirements for

,

operability for a time period in excess of that allowed by TS (i.e.,

2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />).without commencing shutting down the plant.

,

Regarding Unit 2, the emergency diesel engines were subsequently

inspected by the residents and verified to not have been painted

recently, and with no detrimental conditions near or on the fuel

racks.

c. Safety Significance

A preliminary review cf the load sequencing for a station blackout

and LOCA event indicated that Load Group Number Seven requires 3156 kw

within one minute and Load Groups Eight and Nine, which are sequenced

on at 10 minutes and 15 minutes, respectively, would require greater

than 3200 kw. The licensee's initial judgement was that DG 1A would

have stalled upon an attempt to pick up load groups eight and nine.

Also, it is not certain that DG 1A would have been capable of loading

to 3200 kw upon an initial start attempt since the fuel racks had

already been exercised during the first start at the time 3200 kw was

obtained. DG 1B may have been worse relative to loading capabilities,

and probably would not have operated at full capacity, although the

engine was not tested following the discovery of its painted fuel

racks. It is noted that the licensee's loading review is based on

conservative analysis and actual load requirements would probably be

less. The licensee was performing additional analysis of this event

and developing long term corrective actions at the end of the

inspection period.

TS 3.8.1.1 requires two separate and independent diesel generators

to be operable in Modes 1 through 4. TS 3.8.1.1.f requires that,

with both Unit I diesel' generators inoaerable, the '. ;censee: (a)

demonstrate the operability of two offsite A.C. circuits by performing

Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.1.a within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and at least once

per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> thereafter; (b) restore at least one of the inoperable

diesel generators to operable status within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; or (c) be in at

least Hot Standby (Mode 3) within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in Cold

Shutdown (Mode 5)withinthefollowing30 hours.

The licensee operated in excess of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> without initiating a

shutdown with two DGs apparently inoperable (i.e., unable to meet TS

operability criteria). This constitutes an apparent Violation

369/90-14-01: Failure to Follow TS Due to Both Diesel Generators

Being Inoperable.

____- -_ _ - - _ _ __-_____---___--_____---__________I

,

,_.

...'

..

4

d. - Delayed Logging

The inspector noted that DG 1A was not logged inoperable until

10:00 a.m., although control room operators were informed of the

failed test et approximately 9:20 a.m. and f ailure had actually

occurred at 9:06 a.m. In addition, operations personnel had been

aware of the detrimental conditions on DG 1B at approximately

11:00 a.m., but DG 1B was not logged inoperable until 11:34 a.m.

when the control power breaker was opened.

The licensee makes decisions regarding TS actiens >" is ' ability

requirements based on times recorded in the TF 1, * r o a 1 be

noted that simultaneous inoperability of both 'e , e 's of

two hours would place Unit 1 in an Unusual Ev 4 m :V

classification. The licensee did not appear to 4

.

-

< m 'ent

having to declare a UE, since the emergency class m . so < Jure-

was not reviewed until af ter the second DG was det.;n a m able

(at 11:34 a.m. on 6/26). However, the reasor, for nu s srvaiive

' logging times was unable to be explained by the licensee other than

the fact that the normal tagout procedure was to declare a DG

inoparable_ when the control power breaker is opened. . As of the end

-of this inspection, the licensee was conducting further investigation

of this problem and verification of the preliminary sequence of

events.

This is an apparent violation of Operations Management Procedure 2-5,

Technical Specifications Action item Logbook, which requires in

paragraph 6.5 that "All entries should be made in chronological

order at the time of occurrence or when knowledge of the occurrence

is first obtained." This is an apparent Violation 369/90-14-02:

Failure to Follow Operations Procedure for TS Logging.

3. ExitInterview(30703)

The inspection scope and findings identified below were summarized on

July 5,1990, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The

following items were discussed in detail:

Violation 369/90-14-01: Failure to Follow TS Due to Both Diesel

Generators Being Inoperable

Violation 369/90-14-02: Failure to Follow Operations Procedure for

TS Logging

The licensee representatives present offered no dissenting comments, nor

did they identify as proprietary any of the information reviewed by the

inspectors during the course of their inspection,

r