IR 05000298/1985027
| ML20136G763 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1985 |
| From: | Craig Harbuck, Jaudon J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136G724 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-298-85-27, NUDOCS 8511220433 | |
| Download: ML20136G763 (4) | |
Text
sr
') ;
i;
' APPENDIX B
?
U. S.'NUCLEdR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
'
NRC Inspection Report:
50-298/85-27 License:
DPR-46 Docket:
50-298
'
Licensee:
Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 499 Columbus, Nebraska 68601 Facility Name:
Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS)
!
Inspection At:
CNS Site, Brownsville, Nebraska Inspection Conducted:
September 9-13, 1985
.
Inspector:
)
A' W
/4 //#5'
,
m C. C. Harbuck, Project Engineer, Pr ect Section A, Date '
Reactor Projec Bran
.
Approved:
C
[f-c.-
M
//) 1
'
P. J udon, ChiBT, Project Section A Date Rpct{r,PrjectsBranch J.
o
'
-#,
'
A '
if y
Inspection Summary
,
y Inspection Conducted September 9-13, 1985 (Report 50-298/85-27)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the overall' maintenance program implementation.
The inspection involved 36 inspector-hours onsite by
,
one NRC inspector.
,
Results: Within the area inspected, one violation was identified (failure to Y
take adequate c6rrective action for conditions adverse to quality - safety-re-lated equipment problems).
,
,
.,
'
a
,
'.
8511220433 851101
-
PDR ADOCK 05000298 G
~
'
t
,,
m
-
.
_
e
.
,
-2-
.
~
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted-
- J. Sayer,' Acting Division Manager.of Nuclear Operation
- V. L. Wolstenholm, Quality Assurance Manager
~
.
- R.'Brumgart, Acting Operations Manager
'
- W.'Crawford, Acting Maintenance Supervisor
- C. Goings, Regulatory-Compliance Specialist
- E.-M.. Mace, Acting Technical Manager-
- H. A. Jantzen, I&C Supervisor B. Moeller, System Engineer M. Unruh, Maintenance Planner J. Peezley,; Surveillance Coordinator C.~ Bean,-Assistant to Maintenance Planner In addition to those listed, the NRC~ inspector held discussions with several other licensee employees.
- Denotes those present at the exit-meeting.
2.
Maintenance Progran Implementation-The purpose of'thislinspection was to determine whether the maintenance program is being. implemented -in accordance.with regulatory ' requirements and licensee commitments.
'a.
Pfeventive Maintenance.
'
The'NRC inspector reviewed the:11censee's preventive maintenance program.~ This program is governed by licensee maintenance proce-dure'7.0.2, " Work Item Tracking-Preventive Maintenance," Revision 0,.
-
,
September 27, 1984. The program set fo'rth in this procedure appeared to satisfy regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
However, l
the NRC inspector identified an area not addressed by the governing-procedure.
This was that specific maintenance procedures.are not
'~
referenced on the applicable "preventite maintenance cards." These
,.
cards are the only formal means by which the Maintenance Planner assigns preventive maintenance to the various shops.
Notwithstanding this item, the NRC inspector concluded that
'the licensee appeared to be implementing the preventive maintenance j
program according to the approved procedure.
!
t
_
y, i
.
,
-3-
.
'
b.
Surveillance Program The NRC inspector performed a brief review of the licensee's surveillance program. A more in-depth review will be accomplished at a future NRC inspection. The NRC inspector reviewed licensee surveillance procedure 6.0.1, " Surveillance Program," Revision 1,
~
March 4,'1985. The program set forth in this procedure appeared to satisfy regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
c.
Corrective Maintenance' Program The NRC inspector reviewed licensee maintenance procedure 7.0.1,
" Work Item Tracking - Corrective Maintenance," Revision 2, April 19, 1985. The program set forth in this procedure appeared to meet regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
The NRC inspector reviewed the following files of maintenance work
-
requests (MWRs) to verify implementation:
,
System Year Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC).
1984
~
High Pressure Core Injection (HPCI)
1984 Residual Heat Removal (RHR)
1985 Standby Diesel Generators 1985 The NRC inspector identified some problems from this review. - These were:
(1) Leakage by the drain shutoff valve to the RHR Loop A Injection Line. The corrective action was to' cap the line downstream of the leaking valve but failed to initiate plans to repair or replace the valve. Additionally, the action that was taken showed that the system valve lineup was incomplete; it did not list the valve cap which the licensee had installed to contain the leakage. No revision to the valve lineup procedure was made.
(MWR85-1887,1985)
(2) Motor burnup on the operator to the RHR system Drywell Spray Outboard Throttle Valve due to the limit switch actuating pin
having fallen out. This prevented the motor from stopping when the valve was.in the closed position. No action was taken to determine why the pin had fallen out and whether other-valves onsite had the same problem. Also, no evaluation was made to determine if the valve ~ seat had been damaged.
(MWR85-1461, 1985)
,
-
-
..
,
-4-
,
These two examples were identified as a single apparent violation of the licensee's operations quality assurance program requirements in the area of corrective action. The licensee failed to.take adequate corrective actions for the above-noted conditions adverse to
,
quality.
(50-298/8527-01)
3.
Exit Meeting
-
.
The NRC inspector conducted an exit meeting on September 13,.1985, with I
the licensee personnel denoted in paragraph 1.
The NRC senior resident inspector also attended. At this meeting, the findings of the inspection were summarized.
.