ML20138A401
| ML20138A401 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1986 |
| From: | Blake J, Girard E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138A384 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-86-05, 50-369-86-5, 50-370-86-05, 50-370-86-5, NUDOCS 8603140224 | |
| Download: ML20138A401 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000369/1986005
Text
UNITE 3 STATES
km H oq'o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
i
,4 "
REGION 11
101 MARIETT A STREET, N.W.
g
,
a
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
%,...../
,
Report Nos.: 50-369/86-05 and 50-370/86-05
Licensee: Duke Power Company
422 South Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28242
Docket Nos.: 50-369 and 50-370
License Nos.:
l
Facility Name: McGuire 1 and 2
,
Inspection Conducted: February 3 - 7, 1986
Inspector:
[.
b Ah
33
F<
E.
rd
Da e Signed
.
Approved by:
.'
3
60
J.
life, Section Chief
'Dafe Signed
.
E 1 ering Branch
D vi ion of Reactor Safety
l
SUMMARY
!
l
Scope: This routine, announced inspection entailed 31 inspector-hours on site in
the areas of training of personnel responsible for pump and valve maintenance and
performance testing and review of pump and valve test procedures and test
records.
Results:
One violation was identified - Valve position indicator verification,
paragraph 6.
!
l
l
l
l
i
I
l
i
l
!
<
l
!
rd m ro g ,
l
l
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
. .
.
I
.
,
!
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- T. L. McConnell, Station Manager
- D. J. Rains, Superintendent of Maintenance
!
R. A. Johansen, Performance Engineer
l
- D. S. Marquis, Performance Engineer
i
- D. Mendezoff, Engineer Specialist
l
D. N. Smith, Performance Technician
!
R. E. Nix, Senior Instructor (Mechanical Maintenance)
l
L. Wright, Technical Specialist, Training and Safety
l
R.L. Wilson,SeniorInstructor(Engineer / Professional)
l
G. M. Baccich, Associate Instructor (Engineer / Professional)
!
J. D. Wylie, Director of Production Technology Training
l
l
NRC Resident Inspectors
l
l
- W. T. Orders, Senior Resident Inspector
- R. C. Pierson, Resident Inspector
l
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 7,1986, with
those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the
areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.
No
dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
At the time of the
exit interview, the licensee had not had an opportunity to review the
conditions identified in the below listed violation. The licensee confirmed
the condition to NRC Region II in a telephone call later the same day.
Violation 369, 370/86-05-01, Valve position indicator verification,
paragraph 6.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided
to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
!
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
-
-
.
-
.
.
-
-
.
-
r
.
2
5.
Training of Personnel Responsible for Pump and Valve Maintenance and
Performance Testing - Units 1 and 2 (41700)
The inspector reviewed selected examples of the lesson outlines and associat-
ed materials used by the licensee in providing training to personnel respon-
sible for pump and valve maintenance and performance testing. The inspector
reviewed the lesson outlines and training materials for technical adequacy
and accuracy. . The lesson outline examples reviewed by the inspector were as
l
follows:
Engineering Professional Program
-
,
Lesson E/P-TC-AEP-PTA-01 (3/18/85), Pump Theory and Systems
,
Applications
'
l
Lesson E/P-TC-AEP-PTA-02 (3/21/85); Codes, Standards and IWP
l
Testing
Mechanical Maintenance Program
'
-
LessonMM-BM-FA-01(4/30/80), Fasteners
.
I
Lesson MM-BM-FA-02 (3/85), Torquing and Tensioning Tools
'
l
Lesson M -TC-FSS-VMA-01 (4/82), Basic Valve Maintenance
!
Lesson MM-TC-FSS-PUA-01 (10/84), Basic Pump Maintenance
1
!
Nuclear Performance Technician Program
-
l
Lesson PFF-TC-FP-PR-09 (12/22/83), Valve Testing
Instrumentation and Electrical Maintenanc.e Program
-
LessonIE-BE-m-02(9/1/83), Temperature Measurement Methods
LessonIE-BE-M-03(8/22/83), Pressure Measurement
l
Lesson IE-BE-MM-05 (9/83), Flow Measurement
With regard to the licensee's training, the NRC inspector asked the licensee
if they had submitted their training program "Self Evaluation Report for
Technical Staff and Managers" to the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations
(INPO) and if they had subsequently received accreditation from INP0.
The
licensee's Training and Safety Technical Specialist informed the inspector
the report had been submitted to INP0 in December 1985, but that INP0 had
not performed their site audit of the program or granted accreditation.
I
Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Review of Pump and Valve Test Procedures and Records - Units 1 and 2 (61700)
The inspector examined selected examples of the licensee's pump and valve
test procedures and associated test records to verify the licensee's
compliance with Technical Specifications (TSs) 4.0.3, 4.0.4, 4.0.5, and
4.4.6.2.2.a.
Technical Specification 4.0.5 specifies compliance with
.
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
- .
-
-
-
-
- -
_
.7
. .
.
.-
__ , . _ . _ . _ . _
_ _ - _ _
'
,
.
.
.
,
3
1
/
.
t
M inservice testing requirements'of ASME Section XI. The pump and valve test
g'
procedures and records reviewed by the ' inspector were as follows:
Y c-
ASME Section XI, Subsection'IWP testing of Unit 1 Residual Heat Removal
-
'
(RHR) Pump 1A
,
y
~ Procedure:
PT/1/A/4204/01A with changes through 25
Records:
Tests completed 7/84,9/84,12/84,3/85,5/85,8/85
/
and 11/85
ASME Section NIr Subsection' IWV and TS 4.4.6.2.2a testing of Unit 2 RHR
-
System pressure' isolation valve 2ND1B
- Procedure:
PT/2/A/4200/08B with changes through 8
.
Records:
Tests completed 4/19/83, 12/24/83 and 4/30/85.
,
'
Subsection IWV testing of Unit 1 Safety Injection
-
' System Valves INI185A and 1NI184B-
Procedure:
PT/1/A/4200/22 with changes through 8
.
- -
Records:
Tests completed 3/81, 11/82, 3/84 and 5/85
[
In reviewing procedures and records for ASME Code Class 2 valves 1NI185A and
3
INI184B, the inspector found no evidence that these valves had been tested
- J
to verify their remote position indicators accurately reflected valve
!
operation. This (surveillance) testing is required to be performed at least
!
every two years by ASME Section XI.
,
3
Units 1 and 2*have been in operation more than two years.
In response to
t
the NRC ' inspector's questioning, the licensee confirmed that the ASME
(
Section XI position indicator verification inservice testing had not been
'
performed for the subject valves on either Unit 1 or 2.
Technical
-
Specification 4.0.5 specifies that the inservice testing of ASME Section XI
'
shall 'be
performed as Surveillance Requirements.
Technical Specifications 4.0.3 and 4.0.4 specify that failure to perform Surveillance
Requirements within the specified time interval constitutes a failure to
meet Operability requirements _ for a Limiting Condition for Operation and
that the Operational Mode shall not be. entered until the Surveillance
Requirements have been performed.
The licensee entered the Operational Mode for both units without performing
I
the position indicator- testing Surveillance Requirements.
Thus, the
2 _ licensee failed to comply with the Technical Specification 4.0.5 requirement
~?
to perform the testing at least every two years and with the TSs 4.0.3 and
,
4.0.4 requirement to not to enter the Operational Mode until the testing was
performed. This noncompliance with TSs 4.0.3. 4.0.4 and 4.0.5 is identified
as violation 369/370/86-05-01, Valve Position Indicator Verification.
In a
telephone conversation from the NRC Senior Resident Inspector on _
February 10, 1986, the inspector was informed that the required testing of
,
the Unit 1 and Unit 2 valves had been completed and that, although one valve
did not reseat . properly. in' testing and had to be repaired, the condition of
i
1
<
L
,
-m
.
. .
.
.
m
.m
.
.
.
.
. .
.m.
.
. .
. . . .
.
-
. - -
.
. .
.. .. a
. -
.
.
.
. .
p
- . - ,
.
..
..
W
- *
1. ;
4
- N
, \\,
. \\
the valves during the previous plant operational period was determined to
have been adequate to meet their safety function.
One violation was identified in the area examined as described above.
i,
"
8:
,
I
s
s
9
l
<,
.'
!
l
I
i'
)
4
/
lj , .
>
r
jf
_
f
,
A
..
-.m
-.
.
mmm
m
m m.m
m
m