Text

IE Inspec Rept 50-298/78-15 on 780828-30 During Which 1 Item of Noncompliance Was Noted:Failure to Maintain 2 Fire Doors in an Operable Status as Req by Natl Fire Code
	ML20148D963
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	09/12/1978
From:	Johnson E, Madsen G, Verduzco G; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20148D944	List: ML20148D939; ML20148D957; ML20148D963;
References
	50-298-78-15, NUDOCS 7811060055
	Download: ML20148D963 (6)
	v • d • e

- ___ ___ ___.

__

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENF0FCEMENT

REGION IV

Report No. 50-298/78-15

Docket No. 50-298 License No. DPR-46

Licensee: Nebraska Public Power District

i

P. O. Box 499

Columbus, NeSraska 68601

Facility Name: Cooper Nuclear Station ,

!

Inspection At: Cooper Nuclear Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska

Inspection Condt . _ ,. : August 28-30, 1978 I

Principal Inspector: T.N A 9Itt f,8

E. H. Johrson, Reactor Inspector Date

"T.N.de.I% 'l/o.l,a

Ffo G. H. Verduzco, Reactor Inspector (Training) Date

Approved By: 7[v& 8,. cv 9/a/W ;

'G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Operations and Date

'

Nuclear Support Branch

l Insoection Summary

Inspection on fugust _28-30.1978 (Report No. 50-298/78-15)

Areas Inspected Routine, Unannounced inspection of plant operation 3; and

safety reiltWmaintenance activities. The inspection involved twenty 'five (25)

inspector-hours on-site by one inspector.

Results: 0' the two areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations

were noted in one area. One deviation (failure to maintain a fire door in an

operable ste:us as required by National Fire Code - Details, paragraph 2) was

noted in one area.

l

g 3:600 6

. _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

-2-

'CETAILS

Persons Contacted

P. Borer, Technical Assistant to the Station Superintendent

B. Brungardt, Shift Supervisor

R. Creason, Shift Supervisor

L. Lessor, Station Superintendent

R. Peterson, Reactor Engineer

P. Thomason. Assistant to the Station Superintendent

M. Williams, Operations Supervisor

V. Wolstenholm, Quality Assurance Specialist

Present at the exit interivew.

In addition to the above technical and supervisory personnel, the

inspector held discussions with various maintenance, operations,

technical support and administrative members of the plant staff.

1. Plant Status

Curing the period of this inspection, the plant was conductne; > P,ine

power operations at approximately 95% power.

2. Review of Plant Operations

The inspector reviewed the below listed plant logs and records, tid

discussions with shift personnel, observed control room and plant

process instrumentation, toured accessible areas of the plant and

observed routine operations, including routine radiological controls

to determine that no abnormal conditions were in existence and that

oper'ations were being ccnducted in accordance with license conditions

and other NRC requirements.

Night Order Book, May 23, 1978 through August 28, 1978

Shif t Supervisor's Log, May 23, 1978 through August 28, 1978

Control Room Operator's Log, July 24, 1978 through August 5, 1978

Jumper Log - all outstanding entries s

Clearance t.og - all outstanding clearances

Ccntrol Room Log Sheets, July 11, 1978 through July 31, 1978

Auxiliary Patrol Log Sheets, July 11, 1978 through July 31, 1978

Special Instruction Log and Special Order Log - all outstanding entries

Nonconformance Reports, May 14, 1978 through August 20, 1978

.

en a-

On August 28, 1978, following the end of normal working hours, tF~

inspector conducted a .our of accessible areas of the station. It

was noted that one fire door in tne reactor building 903 foot level

leading to the southwest quadrant was blocked open by a water hose.

The inspector noted that the hose was connected to an instrument

tap at one end but disconnected at the other end. No work was in

progress in the vicinity of the hose, nor was a watchstander present

at the fire door.

The National Fire Code NFPA 80-1977, " Fire Doors and Windows," Section

14 .12, requires m pect that doors shall be operable at all times and

they shall be kept losed and latched or arranged for automatic closing.

Cemrary to thn Code requirement, the blocking open of the southwest

qui.drant reactor building fire door rendered this fire door inoperable.

This constitutes e deviation from an industry approved code.

No other items of noncompliance or deviations were noted in this area.

During the tour of the facility, the following minor discrepancies

were noted and brought to the attention of the licensee for review and

correction. The air start piping for number 1 diesel generator was

noted to be vibrating while the air start flasks were recharging.

Although this vibration was not excessive, it might be indicative of

a loose piping hanger or support. The inspector noted that the grout

sealer in one pipe chase in the vicinity of the CRD pressure control

station had spalled, indicrlive of deterioration of the grout or

possible piping vibration in this area. These items were discussed

with the Station Superintendent during the exit interview who indicated

that they would be reviewed and appropriate corrective action initiated.

3. Safety Related Maintenance Activities

The objective of this inspection effort was to determine that maintenance

activities on safety related equipment were scheduled and controlled in

the manner required by the licensee's Quality Assurance Program. This

effort also verified that maintenance activities were properly performed

and inspected and that Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for

Operation were met while the equipment was out of service.

The inspector reviewed the below listed maintenance activities:

MWR # Subject :

1

78-6-177 Source Range D Reading Erratic l

78-6-135 Reactor Recirculation Pump Seal Pressure Instrument )

78-4-89 Drywell to Torus Vacuum Breakers I

..

4-

MWR # Subject

78-4-219 Control Rod Drive 30-35 - Align and Renew Gaskets

and 0-Rings

78-4-173 HPCI-M0-15 Seal Ring Leak

78-4-205 Overhaul Control Rod Drive #1620

78-7-11 250 VDC Battery Charger Fails to Charge

78-169 Instrument Sensing Line Plugged

78-8-75 Diesel Generator #2A Air Receiver Relief Valve

Within the area of this inspection, no iters of noncompliance or

deviations were noted; hovver, the following additional findi.ngs were

made.

For six of the nine maintenance activities reviewed, the inspector noted

that block 4 of the Malfunction / Work Request fonns (MWR) a quality control

inspection was required. However, the type of inspection specified was

indicated to be " Job Completion" or " Review Completion." The inspector

was unable to determine what constituted this type of QC inspection.

The licensee had no quality control procedures which specify what is to

constitute a job completion QC inspection. Section 4.1.1 of the licensee's

Quality Assurance Manual describes Quality Control Inspections and

requires that safety related niaintenance shall include appropriate quality

control checkpoints, were applicable. Quality Assurance Manual states,

"The QC checkpoint shall identify specific work which is to be subjected

to inspection or verification and shall provide, in detail, the elements

of work to be inspected which include: . . 2. Type of Inspection or

Observation . . . ."

During inspection 78-13, the inspector reviewed the licensee's quality

control activities for safety related maintenance (Reference IE Inspection

Report 50-298/78-13, Details, paragraph 4) and noted that the licensee

had failed to record the type of observations and the results of quality

control inspections for several safety related maintenance activities.

This item was identified as an item of noncompliance. In the corrective

action for this item of noncompliance, it will be necessary for the

licensee to establish definitive requirements for quality control

inspection of maintenance activities. This corrective action will

adequately resolve the questions raised above regarding the " type of

inspection or observation." This item is designated as an unresolved

item pending completion of licensee's corrective action on the item of

noncompliance described in Inspection Report 78-13 (Unresolved Iten

! 7815-1).

In reviewing the overhaul of control rod drive #1620 (MWR 78-4-205)

the inspector noted that upon disassembly of the drive, the licensee

determined that a sei;al number was not present on the rod and tube.

.

_ _ __._ __ _ _ _ _ . . _ _. _ _ -. .

- .

-5- l

l

. Maintenance on this drive was conducted in accordance with Maintenance l

Procedure 7.2.39, " Control Rod Drive Inspection." Attachment B to '

this procedure governs the reassembly of the drive and provides check- '

points and signoff block:; for recording specific data regarding the

drive. Step 6A of attc:cirent B to the maintenance procedure requires

a dimensional check of the rod and tube be performed unless:

a. The serial number on the coupling rod is identical with the

serial number on the CRD flange; i

b. If no CRD parts have becn replaud, other than seals, bushings

and 0-Rings; and

c. If no difficulty has been reported in uncoupling the CRD during

service in the reactor. l

The inspector noted that these dimensions were not verified for the

rod and tube in contral drive #1620 when the serial number on the :

coupling rod could not be verified. The inspector discussed this item

with the licensee representative who indicated that the leak test of

this drive had not yet been conducted and that it was normal practice

to perform the dimensional checks on the rod and tube at the time the ,

leak test is performed. This item will remain unresolved pending

completion of the leak test and dimensional checks on this rod

(Unresolved Item 7815-2).

In reviewing MWR #78-4-173, covering the repair of a seal ring leak on

valve HPCI-M0-15, the inspector noted that the repair was accomplished

by tightening down the cap screws on the seal ring. The inspector

reviewed the instruction manual and manufacturer's drawing for this

valve and determined that the allowable torque for the seal ring

retainer cap screws was not specified. The inspector discussed this !

with a licensee representative and expressed his concern that this

apparent deficiency in the manufacturer's instruction manual had not

been identified during the performance of maintenance on this valve. !

, The adequacy of the licensee S maintenance procedures and the l

manufacturer's instruction manuals will receive continued followup

during future inspections.

4. In-Office Review of Licensee Event Reports

Licensee event reports are issued in accordance with the requirements

of Technical Specification 6.7.2.A and 6.7.2.B to report certain events

to the NRC. When received at the regional office these reports are

reviewed for their safety significance and completeness by the inspector.

Certain reports are selected for a detailed review at the site. The i

status of these reports is indicated in the report for the inspection '

during which on-site followup was conducted.

l

.. - - - - - - .-. . - . - . - - _ .

!

-__ _ - - _ _ _ _ _

^

.

-6-

The below listed reoorts have been reviewed by the inspector in-office.

Based on the 100 percent review by the inspector of all licensee

internal nonconformance reports, discussions with licensee personnel

during the course of inspections, and periodic review of station logs,

these reports were closed with no further on-site followup.

LER # Subject

78-8 HPCI Isolation on Hi Indicated Steam Flow From

Air in Sensing Line

78-21 Crud Buildup in Excess From Check Valve

78-23 Recirculation Riser /CS Piping Indicati1ns

+78-27 REC System Weld Leak

5. Unresolved Items

Unresolved Items are matters about which more information is required

to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncom,nliance

or deviations. The following unresolved items were identified during

this inspection.

7815-1 - Type of Quality Control Inspection Performed (paragraph 3)

7815-2 - Dimeiiional Check of Uncoupling Rod on CRD #1620 (paragraph 3)

6. Exit Interview

The inspector met with the Station Superintendent at the conclusion of ,

the inspection. The scope of the inspection and the findings above

. ore discussed. The Station Superintendent acknowledged the findings

relative to the deviation detailed in paragraph 2 above, and indicated

the item would be reviewed and corrected.

Followed up on in IE Report 50-298/78-06, Details, paragraphs 7 and 8.

+Followed up on in IE Report 50-298/78-10, Details, paragraph 3.

ML20148D963

Text

Navigation menu

Search