ML20138M740
| ML20138M740 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1985 |
| From: | Dance H, William Orders, Pierson R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138M724 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-85-30, 50-370-85-32, NUDOCS 8511040270 | |
| Download: ML20138M740 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000369/1985030
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:[pm REcq*'o, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O 's
^ R E GION 11 h ,([' . 101 MARIETTA STREET. N.W.
{{ f ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323 \\ . .~ .s , .. Report Nos. 50-369/85-30 and 50-370/85-32 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: McGuire Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17 Inspection Conducted: gust 21 - September 20, 1985 Inspectors:_ . A __ _ /#// [d W. Orcers, . ior sident/l pector Da S'gne A .R. P rson, Kesid - In spe;AqdfF'M- ~/$ f. - - ~ Da e rigned j n Approved by: \\ A- /c//8 7 Hugh C. Dande, Section Chief Dde igned Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY Scope: This routine unannounced inspection involved 328 inspection hours on site in the areas of operations, safety verification, surveillance testing and maintenance activities. Results: Of the areas inspected two violations were identified in the area of facility operations and one deviation in the area of surveillance testing. 8511040270 851021 PDR ADOCK 05000369 G PDR i
.. - = . - _ _ . - - - . _ - - . . i , ' i , . i REPORT DETAILS
1. Persons Contacted l Licensee Employees 4
- T. McConnell, Plant Manager
i
- B. Travis, Superintendent of Operations
- D. Rains, Superintendent of Maintenance
j -
- B. Hamilton, Superintendent of Technical Services
- L. Weaver, Superintendent of Administration
1 j
- M. Sample, Superintendent of Integrated Scheduling
- E. McCraw, License and Compliance Engineer
- D. Mendezoff, License and Compliance Engineer
- ~
- D. Marquis, Performance Engineer
- R. White, IAE Engineer
- R. Branch, Site QA Supervisor
!' Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, ! technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office . personnel. l
- Attended exit interview.
> 2. Exit Interview , , i The inspection scope and findings were summarized September 27, 1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee did not identify l as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection. , I 3. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters I (Closed) Violation 370/83-55-01. Failure to implement prerequisite 4-6 of Procedure IP/0/A/3010/06 in that red tags were not placed on breakers of the
l decay heat removal system valves, NO-1 and NO-2. Adequate corrective steps have been taken to avoid further violations of this type. This item is
closed. i ! (Closed) Violation 370/84-04-01. Failure to follow procuedres resulting in ! the destruction of the 2-B NV pump and reactor trip. Adequate corrective ! steps have been taken to avoid further violations of this type. This item is closed. (Closed) Violation 369/84-10-01. Failure to follow procedure concerning , independent verification resulting in the operability of 1-A NV pump for 7 i days in violation of Technical Specification Action Statements 3.1.2.2, . 3.1.2.4 and 3.5.2. Adequate corrective steps have been taken. This item is closed. l - . .- - .--- - - - - - - . - - - - - - - -
2 (Closed) Violation 369/84-11-02 and 370/84-09-03. Failure to perform required testing of new penetrations leading to violation of containment integrity. The licensee has committed to reviewing containment integrity at the end of each outage to assure that all completed or uncompleted modifications have not adversely affected containment integrity. This should eliminate future occurrences of this problem. These items are closed. 4 Unresolved Items An Unresolved Item is a matter about which more information is required to determine whether it is acceptable or may involve a violation or deviation. One unresolved item was identified during this report period and is discussed in paragraph 8. 5. Plant Operations The inspection staff reviewed plant operations during the report period, to verify conformance with applicable regulatory requirements. Control room logs, shift supervisors logs, shift turnover records and equipment removal and restoration records were routinely perused. Interviews were conducted with plant operation,s, maintenance, chemistry, health physics, and performance personnel. Activities within the control room were monitored during shifts and at shift changes. Actions and/or activities observed were conducted as prescribed in applicable station administrative directives. The complement of licensed personnel on each shift met or exceeded the minimum required by technical specifications. Plant tours taken during the reporting period included but were not limited to the turbine buildings, auxiliary building, units 1 and 2 electrical equipment rooms, units 1 and 2 cable spreading rooms, and the station yard zone inside the protected area. . During the plant tours, ongoing activities, housekeeping, security, equip- l ment status and radiation control practices were observed. i Unit 1 Operations l ' McGuire Unit 1 began the reporting period in Mode 1 operating at 100% power. It was maintained in Mode 1 at or about 100% power for the duration of the reporting period. - - - .-- --
- - - _ . - , .. _ . - i 3 . Unit 2 Operations McGuire Unit 2 began the reporting period in Mode 1 operating at 100*4 power. It was maintained in Mode 1 at or about 100*; power until August 24
when power was reduced to 10*4 and the turbine was taken off line to facilitate vibration analysis on the main generator. Following this , analysis the main generator was paralleled to the grid at 1:50 a.m. on , August 26, 1985. Power was subsequently increased and the unit was maintained at or about 100*s power for the duration of the reporting period.
6. Battery Charger EVCS ! On July 23, 1985, station personnel determined that the operability surveillance test had not been performed on the station standby battery charger EVCS in the required time frame. The standby charger can be aligned to supply vital loads when one of the four normal vita chargers is out of service. On August 13, 1985, it was found that the standby charger had been < placed in service at least twice supplying vital loads. These two instances occurred during the period of July 1 thru July 15, 1985. The four normal vital chargers have been out of service for maintenance or testing approximately 26 other tines during the period after the surveil- , i lance had expired. It cannot be readily determined how many additional . times EVCS was placed in service during the performance of these tests. The first surveillance test for EVCS was completed on July 9,1982. On 4 May 27,1984 the 18 month surveillance interval plus the 4.5 month grace period had expired for the EVCS standby charger. Technical Specification 4.8.2.1.2 does not specifically identify the standby ' charger surveillance testing requirements. Further, the Technical Specification Reference Manual did not address the standby charger. These documents were used to establish the equipment requiring periodic operational testing at the beginning of the PM/PT program. Resultantly, the , program did not include this test. , l A preventive maintenance (PM) schedule was established on EVCS in 1981.
This PM involves a generic inspection for cleanliness, physical damage, etc., and also during recent tests has included an output voltage check to
provide a functional verification of the charger operation. This PM is performed.every three months but does not satisfy the output current test j l requirements stated in the Technical Specifications. i
In as much as this violation meets the criteria discussed in 10CFR Part 2 Appendix C, in that it was licensee identified, was a Severity Level IV , ' violation, was reported and corrected and could not reasonably be expected I to have been prevented, a notice of violation will not be issued. (
l t . - - . . - . ... - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - . - - -.- ---
.- . - - _ . - . . .- - - 4 . . 7. Technical Specification Violation On September 11, 1985 at 9:10 a.m. the 1A Diesel Generator was taken out of service during the performance of PT/1/A/4350/15A, Diesel Generator 1A Periodic Test. Later that morning at 9:50 a.m. the supply breaker to the B pressurizer heaters tripped open. When this occurred the unit entered the action statement of Technical Specification 3.8.1.1 which in summary says that all required systems, subsystems, trains, components, and devices that cepend on tne remaining operable diesel generator as a source of emergency power must also be operable and further states that if these conditions are not satisfied within 2 hours the unit must be in at least hot standby within the next 6 hours and cold shutdown within the following 30 hours. In as , much as the operators had overlooked the consequences of the B pressurizer heaters tripping, no action was taken. Technical Specification 3.4.3 requires for a pressurizer to be operable that at least two groups of pressurizer heaters be operable, each having a capacity of at least 150 KW. The action statement requires that the unit be in at least hot standby with the reactor trip breakers open within 6 hours and in hot shutdown within the following 6 hours with the pressurizer inoperable. Since the B pressurizer heaters were tripped open and the A pressurizer heaters emergency power supply was not available, two groups of pressurizer breakers were not available and the pressurizer was inoperable. The 1 A diesel generator was returned to service at 7:33 p.m. that evening, the B pressurizer heaters were restored to operable status at 6: 46 a.m. on September 12. The net effect was that from 9:50 a.m. until 7:33 p.m., for a total of 9 hours and 43 minutes, two trains of pressurizer heaters with back up emergency power were not available, in violation of Technical Specification 3.8.1.1 and Technical Specification 3.4.3. This is a Violation (50-369/ 85-30-01). 8. Filter Testing During a review of the regulatory requirements associated with the preoperational ano surveillance testing of the McGuire Auxiliary Building Filtered Exhaust System (VA), it was determined that the preoperational testing performed on both units VA systems was apparently nct performed in accordance with documented commitments as detailed below. McGuire FSAR Section 9.4.2.3 and Table 9.4.2-3 states that the in place , testing of the VA systems, specifically the HEPA and charcoal filters, was conducted in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.52 (Revision 2, March 1978). Regulatory Guide 1.52 in turn obligates the licensee to ANSI N510-1975. These requirements stipulate that the airflow distribution to the HEPA ! filters and iodine a~ sorbers should be tested in place for uniformity o initially and after maintenance affecting the ' low distribution. The -- ,_ . _ _ __ .- . ._. - -
_ - _ . __ _ _ - _. 5 - -
testing was to have been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of ANSI N510-1975. In reviewing completed pre-operational test TP-0-A-1450-02, the preoperation filter test for auxiliary building, filtered exhaust trains 1 and 2, it appears that the sections of the procedure associated with the airflow ' distribution test on both units were deleted prior to performance based on a letter of operability from a vendor. The tests were never successfully comoleted. Furthermore, ANSI N510-1975, Section 12.5 In place Leak Test, Absorber, Absorber Stace, Procedure, requires that during the actual perfor- mance of the absorber test, at least four upstream samples and five downstream samples be taken to determine filter penetration. Tne completed preoperational tests for both units i ndicate that only three samples were taken. This challenges the viability of the tests. In view of the above findings, it is concluded that the preoperational tests performed on both units VA systems were not performed in accordance with documented commitments. This is a (Deviation 50-369/85-30-02, 50-370/ 85-32-01). Ghen the fact that the airflow distribution tests were not performed, and given that the results of these tests could affect the results of other surveillance tests, i.e., the representativeness of the charcoal samples sent in for laboratory analysis, an Unresolved Item (50-369/85-30-03, 50-370/85-32-02) will be carried forward pending the resolution of the apparent deviation and the completion of a detailed review of filter testing at McGuire. 9. Shift Staffing On Friday, September 6, 1985 at approximately 3:00 p.m. while conducting a control room tour, the Inspector noted that none of the Senior Reactor Operators (SRO) were present who were identified on the shift turnover checklist as being required to be in the control room at the time. Upon
questioning the personnel who were there, it was determined that there was an SRO present, fulfilling the requirement of Technical Specification 6.2. Technical Specification 6.2.2 (b) requires that while either unit is in i moces 1, 2, 3, or 4 at least one licensed SRO snall be in the control room. ' Station Directive 3.1.9, Relief at Duties of Plant Operation, a procedure which implements the requirements Technical Specification 6.2.2 specifies that in Modes 1-4, one of the individuals designated therein with a double asterisk, shall be designated Control Room Senior Reactor Operator and shall be located within the Control Room. Contrary to those requirements, none of the individuals so designated were present. This constitutes a violation for failure to follow procedure (369/85-30-04, 370/85-32-03). l l , , _ . . . _ _ _ . , , _ . _ . ,____m m,_ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ , _ . . , __ . , _ _ . _ . _ _ _
[ 6 - . 10. Surveillance Testing The surveillance tests below were analyzed and/or witnessed by the inspector to ascertain procedural and performance adequacy and conformance with acclicable Technical Specifications. The selected tests witnessed were examined to ascertain that current written approved procedures were available and in use, that test equipment in use was calibrated, that test prerequisites were met, system restoration completed and test results were adequate. ' PT/0/A/4350/08E EVCC Charger Service Test PT/2/A/4403/01B RN 2B Performance Test PT/2/A/4252/01 CA Pump #2 Performance Test
j pT/1/A/4350/15A 1A D/G Periodic Test 11. Maintenance Observations 1 The maintenance activities below were analyzed and/or witnessed by the resident inspection staff to ascertain procedural and performance adequacy and conformance with applicable Technical Specifications. The selected activities witnessed were examined to ascertain that where applicable, current written approved procedures were available and in use, that prerequisites were met. equipment restoration completed and maintenance results were adequate. Work Request Title 86234 SA-48 Turbine Driven CA Pump Steam Supply 86262 VA Filter Exhaust System j 12. Open Items Review
The following items were reviewed in order to determine the adequacy of i corrective actions, the implications as they pertain to safety of i operations, the applicable reporting requirements, and licensee review of the event. Based upon the results of this review, the items are herewith closed. 1 i I . . . . .. - - . . .- - . -
,. - . . --- - . .- 7 .- Unit 1 Unit 2 (cont'd) i ' ITEM NUMBER ITEM NUMBER LER 84-09 LER 83-68 LER 83-69 Unit 2 LER 83-71 ITEM NUMBER LER 83-72 LER 83-73 LER 83-06 LER 83-74 LER S3-19 LER 83-75 LER 83-19 LER 83-77 LER 83-25 LER 83-78 LER 83-26 LER 83-79 LER 83-27 LER 83-80 LER 83-28 LER 83-81 LER S3-30 LER 83-82 LER 83-31 LER 83-83 LER 83-32 LER 83-84 LER 83-33 LER 83-85 LER 83-34 LER 83-86 LER 83-36 LER 83-87 LER 83-37 LER 83-88 LER 83-38 LER 83-89 LER 83-39 LER 83-90 LER 83-40 LER 83-91 LER 83-41 LER 83-92 LER 83-42 LER 84-01 LER 83-43 LER 84-02 LER 83-45 LER 84-03 LER S3-47 LER 84-04 LER 83-48 LER 84-05 LER 83-49 LER 84-06 LER 83-51 LER 84-08 LER 83-52 LER 84-09 LER 83-55 LER 84-11 LER 83-56 LER 84-13 LER 83-58 LER 84-14 LER 83-60 LER 84-15 LER 83-61 LER 84-18 LER 83-62 LER 84-20 LER 83-63 LER 84-21 LER 83-65 LER 84-26 LER 83-66 LER 84-29 LER 83-67 LER 84-33 , - - - . - - - - - - - - ,-,,.-..,.v,- , - . . , . , , , - , - , . , . - - -.,g. , , . . , , .-,,a-, ,,, - , .-, . -,- -- - ,,. , . }}