ML20149M171
| ML20149M171 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1988 |
| From: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802250384 | |
| Download: ML20149M171 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000369/1985006
Text
-
- )
-
.
m
.
FEB 19 USS
Docket Nos. 50-369, 50-370
Duke Power Company
ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President
Nuclear Production Department
422 South Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28242
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-369/85-06 AND 50-370/85-06
Thank you for your response of July 26, 1985, to our Notice of Violation issued
on June 28, 1985, for
violation 369/85-06-04 and 370/85-06-03.
Due to an
administrative oversight, we did not respond earlier to your rec;uest regarding
the noted violations.
We are hereby documenting our actions relative to your
request.
In your response you deny the violation.
You feel the violation raised two
concerns, lack of notification to plant operations personnel of a potential
backleakage problem past auxiliary feedwater check valves and the failure to
take prompt corrective action for the improper installation of the turbine
driven auxiliary feedwater pump discharge stop check valve, which you
adequately addressed.
After careful consideration of the bases for your denial of the violation, we
have concluded, for the reasons presented in the enclosure to the letter, that
the violation occurred as stated in the Notice of Violation.
As discussed in
your response, we understand the stop check valves have been replaced on both
Units 1 ai 2 and you have stated that you are in full compliance.
We will
examine the implementation of your corrective action during future inspections.
1
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
M
J. Nelson Grace
i
Regional Administratce
Enclosure:
Evaluations and Conclusions
cc w/ encl:
T. L. McConnell, Station Manager
Senior Resident inspector - Catawba
bec w/ encl:
(See page 2)
8802250384 880219
i
ADOCK 050
9
\\
G
11 01
.
.
.
4
Duke Power Company
2
bec w/ encl:
NRC Resident Inspector
DRS Technical Assistant
D. Hood, NRR
Document Control Desk
State of South Carolina
RII
RII
/
RII
n1I
i
ebis
v(A&ptJVZEg
)_$
E
MErnst
)
er:er
02/t//88
2//7/88
y
gg
o >ifflB8 021 188<
1
_
-
.
. _ .
-
.
-.
-
- -
~
.
k
!
,
9
I
ENCLOSURE
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS
i
On June 28, 1985, a Notice of Violation was issued for violation 369/85-06-04,
!
370/85-06-03 identified during a routine NRC inspection.
Duke Power Company
l
responded to the Notice on July 26, 1985.
Duke denied the violation on the
basis that they promptly identified and corrected the problem associated with
,
the auxiliary feedwater pump suction piping overpressurization.
l
l
$
'
Restatement of Violation
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI as implemented by Duke Power Compcny (DPC)
Topical Report, Quality Assurance Program Duke-1-A, Amendment 7. Section
i
17.2.16 requires that conditions advorse to quality be promptly identified and
,
corrected and that the identification of the significant condition, the cause
l
of the condition and the corrective action shall be documented and reported to
i
appropriate levels of management.
{
Contrary to the above, conditions adverse to quality were not promptly
l
identified and corrected, as detailed below:
An occurrence of August ?5,1981, on Unit 1 as reported in Licensee Event
l
Report 369/81-136, caused overpret.surization of the suction side of the turbine
~
driven auxiliary feedwater pump.
Identified as contributing to this problem
was the stop check valve on the outlet of the pump being mounted in a
horizontal position which prevents the closure of this valve to be aided by
,'
gravity as designed.
Furthermore, on November 11, 1981, Westinghouse notified
DPC of a potential problem concerning the design of the audliary feedwater
[
,
pump discharge piping valve arrangement such that damage could occur which
f
would compromise the safety-related function of the auxiliary feedwater system.
!
i
Westinghouse in this letter, recomrrended system modifications and an operating
l
!
procedures amendment to detect and correct this problem,
j
No actions were taken on these items identified above until September 5,1984, when
!
'
NSM 1-1705 for Unit 1 and NSM 2-0550 for Unit 2 were generated to replace the
l
existing stop check valves with a different design valve, and NSM's 1-1706 and
!
2-0551 were generated to install a temperature monitoring system as reconnended
i
by Westinghouse.
As of March 12, 1985, NSM 1-1706 and NSM-20551 were in the
'
process of being installed and NSM 1-1705 and NSM 2-0550 were scheduled for
i
outages in 1986 due to material delivery,
t
!
)
Sunwary of Licensee's Response
!
The licensee contends that following the August 25, 1981 overpressurization
'
appropriate corrective action was taken.
The licensee feels two concerns were
.
raised by the violation,
j
,
1
1
,
1
!
.
_
-
.
. - .
- _ _ _ _
-
-
. -
.
-
- - -
.
.-
-
.
!
"
.
.
i
a
i
Enclosure
2
!
The first concern was a lack of notification to plant operations personnel of a
,
potential problem with backleakage past auxiliary feedwater check valves.
The
,
4
backleakage pertains to a waterhammer resulting from check valve leakage.
The
licensee states that plant operations personnel were not notified in 1981 of
'
,
potential waterhanner problems because a Duke Power evaluation found this
'
particular situation did not exist at McGuire Nuclear Station.
j
i
The second concern involved a failure to take prompt corrective action for the
improper installation of the tur"ine driven auxiliary feedwater pump (TDAFWP)
'
discharge stop check valve.
On August 25, 1981, the suction piping of the
t
TDAFWP was overpressurized.
The licensee felt their solution to install a
relief valve in the suction piping and ensure that the mini-flow line to the
'
upper surge tank would always be open when the pump was not operating was
appropriate considering the knowledge of the potential problems at the time.
Since the 1981 solution, the licensee states recurrence of the TOAFWP suction
i
overpressurization and industry studies have made it more apparent that the
i
addition of relief valves may not provide a total solution and that more
insurance against loss of auxiliary feedwater was required.
1
As discussed in the licensee's response, as of July 26, 1985, further
corrective steps have been taken.
Temperature indication on discharge piping
was installed and the stop check valves were replaced on both McGuire units.
NRC Evaluation
The NRC has reviewed the licensee's response and does not agree that the
,
licensee's corrective action was prompt or adequate.
The licensee's investi-
!
gation following the August 25, 1981 overpressurization event discovered the
i
stop check valve (ICA-22) in the discharge line of the Unit 1 TDAFWP was
improperly installed.
The identification of the improperly installed valve
-
should have been sufficient to initiate replacement of the valves on both
units.
Also following a January 1984 industry report and a review by the
licensee a DPC memorandum dated June 24, 1984, identified the discharge stop
check valves as being improperly installed on both units and should be
corrected.
On August 26 and again on August 30, 1984, the TDAFWP suction
piping was overpressurized due to backleakage.
Contributing to this problem
was the stop check valve on the outlet of the pump being improperly installed.
It was not until September 5,1984, that Nuclear Station Modifications (NSM)
were initiated by the licensee to replace the valves.
NRC Conclusion
From the evaluation given above the NRC concludes that conditions adverse to
quality were not promptly identified and corrected and the violation occurred
as stated.