ML20133C246
| ML20133C246 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 07/26/1985 |
| From: | Zech G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Andrews R OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133C248 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8508060416 | |
| Download: ML20133C246 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000285/1985009
Text
,
'
'[I'
\\o
'
UNITED STATES
.
- ' !
}
NUOLCAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
g
t
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
t
os
/
July 26, 1985
Docket No. 50-285
Omaha Public Power District
ATTN: Mr. R. L. Andrews
Division Manager, Nuclear Production
'
1623 Harney Street
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
INSPECTION NO. 50-285/85-09
Enclosed is the report of the special team inspection conducted by R. C. Wil' on
s
and other NRC representatives on April 29 to May 3, 1985, at the engineering
offices of Omaha Public Power District and Fort Calhoun Station Unit 1 of
activities authorized by NRC License No. DPR-40.
The team's findings were
discussed with you and members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The inspection reviewed your implementation of a program as required by 10 CFR 50.49 for establishing and maintaining the qualification of electric equipment
within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49. The inspection also included evaluations of
the implementation of equipment qualification corrective action commitments made
as a result of the January 11, 1983, Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and the
November 10, 1982, Franklin Research Center Technical Evaluation Report (TER).
Within this area, the inspection consisted of examinations of selected procedures
and records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
The inspection determined that you have implemented a program to meet the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.49 and your corrective active commitments relative
to SER/TER deficiencies. Six deficiencies in your program implementation,
summarized in Appendix A, are classified as Potential Enforcement / Unresolved
Items, and will be referred to the NRC Region IV office for further actior,.
These include incomplete demonstration of qualification for four equipment
types; for one of these, Allis-Chalmers motors, appropriate vendor-recommended
maintenance was neither incorporated into plant procedures nor performed.
Two other deficiencies are classified as Open Items, and a future NRC inspection
will review your corrective actions concerning them. Details of the deficiencies
are discussed in the enclosed inspection report.
8508060416 850726
ADOCM 05000285
'G
,
. - _ . .. _-
.
.
-
..
. _ . _
.
. _ =
.
.
.-
,
s
-
.
- .
-
.
..
Omaha Public Power District
-2-
July 26, 1985
.
Your corrective actions regarding the identified deficiencies should not be
delayed pending either a future NRC inspection or further action by the
NRC Region IV Office.
We are available to discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely,
)?
'b
Gary
Zech, Chief
.
,
Vendor Program Branch
Division of Quality Assurance, Vendor,.
and Technical Training Center Programs -
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Enclosure:
Inspection Report No. 50-285/85-09
i
.
,
T
[
~
t
a
-t
l
?
T
e
.h
.
. , . +
-
,
,
.
. - . - - , , ,
. - . ,
, --
.,
,,a,
.
~.
- .
-
.
.
APPENDIX A
.
Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Items
As a result of the special equipment qualification inspection on April 29 to
May 3, 1985, the following items have been referred to NRC Region IV as
Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Items (paragraph references are to detailed
portions of the inspection report).
1.
Contrary to paragraphs (e)(5) and (f) of 10 CFR 50.49, Omaha Public Power
District (OPPD) had not established nor performed a maintenance program
to preserve Allis-Chalmers component cooling water pump motors in a
qualified state, nor was an analysis performed to demonstrate the
extended life of replacement windings.
(Paragraph 4.D.(4),
Item 50-285/85-09-06)
-
2.
Contrary to paragraphs (d)(1) and (k) of 10 CFR 50.49 an'd paragraph 5.2.5
of the D0R Guidelines, OPPD did not document required accuracies for most
post-accident monitoring transmitters nor compare them with errors
reported from qualification type tests.
(Paragraph 4. A.(1)(b), Item
50-285/85-09-02)
3.
Contrary to paragraph (g) of 10 CFR 50.49, OPPD did not adequately
demonstrate and/or document qualification of Conax electrical penetration
assemblies modified by 0 PPD with RTV silicone rubber.
(Paragraph 4.D.(1),
Item 50-285/85-09-03)
4.
Contrary to paragraph (g) of 10 CFR 50.49, OPPD did not adequately
demonstrate and/or document qualification of States Company terminal
blocks modified by 0 PPD with RTV silicone rubber.
(Paragraph 4.D.(2),
Item 50-285/85-09-04)
5.
Contrary to paragraph (g) of 10 CFR 50.49, OPPD did not adequately
demonstrate and/or document qualification of Rockbestos Pyrotrol III
cable.
(Paragraph 4.D.(3), Item 50-285/85-09-05)
6.
Contrary to paragraphs (d)(4) and (k) of 10 CFR 50.49,-0 PPD's documentation
did not establish that the harsh environment threshold total radiation dose
of 10E5 Rads was low enough to ensure that radiation damage to all potential
Master List equipment was adequately considered.
(Paragraph 4. A.(1).(a),
Item 50-285/85-09-01)
,