ML20209G972
| ML20209G972 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 08/27/1986 |
| From: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609150122 | |
| Download: ML20209G972 (3) | |
Text
F h/)
DUKE POWER GOMPANY P.O. box 33189 CHARLOTTE, N.C. 28242 HALH. TUCKER retzenown V905 PDESIDENT (704) 3mS31
""""~~~
US SEP 3 Pl;Jl}
August 27, 1986 Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323
Subject:
Catawba Nuclear Station RII:PKV/PHS/P.SL 50-413/86-27
Dear Dr. Grace:
Attached are our responses to Violation No. 413/86-27-02 and Violation 413/86-27-03 as identified in the subject Inspection Report.
Very truly yours, N
i
}&
Hal B. Tucker LPT/18/slb Attachment xc: NRC Resident Inspector Catawba Nuclear Station l
F609150122 860827
~
l PDR ADOCK 05000413 Ig p,o, f O
Duke Power Company Response to Violation 413/86-27-02 Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2.
Maintenance Management Procedure 1.0, Work Request Preparation, Section 4.10, requires the job supervisor to sign approval of a work request if the problem identified has been resolved and expected results are produced.
Contrary to the above, on June 23, 1986, Work Request No. 21552 OPS for valve no.
ICA46B was signed off when the corrective maintenance performed was not adequate to correct the deficient condition of the valve.
Response
1.
Admission or Denial of Violation Duke Power Company admits the violation.
2.
Reasons for Violation if Admitted i
The valve, ICA46B, failed under dynamic conditions with system flow and pressure in the line. The first crew assigned to work the valve checked the operation under dynamic conditions. The valve failed to close during the test.
The work request was turned over to the oncoming relief shift. This crew went to check the valve, not under dynamic conditions which is the normal practice, and the valve worked correctly. At some point in the troubleshooting process, the technicians found a blown fuse and replaced it.
They did another functional check, not under dynamic conditions, which passed again. The work request was sent to performance section for " retest".
Performance passed the retest and the work request was closed ouc by IAE Supervision.
3.
Corrective Actions Taken and Results Achieved a.
Valve actuator for ICA46B was replaced with an actuator certified to the i
individual application torque.
b.
Valve actuator was retested under dynamic flow conditions and passed, c.
A memorandum for file addressed to IAE management and supervisors was written to make all personnel aware of this type situation in the future.
4.
Corrective Actions Actions taken in Section 3 above ensure avoidance of future violations.
i 5.
Date in Full Compliance l
Duke Power Company is now in full compliance.
Duke Power Company Response to Violation 413/86-27-03 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion V as implemented by Duke Power Company Topical Report Quality Assurance Program, Amendment 9, section 17.2.5 requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by and accomplished with documented instructions, procedures, or drawings and that these procedures include appropriate quantitative acceptance criteria.
Contrary to the above, licensee procedure IP/0/A/3820/11, Certification of Rotork Valve Actuators did not contain appropriate quantitative acceptance criteria in i
that it referenced " rated" torque for valve actuators rather than required terque
?or individual applications requiring torque settings greater than " rated" value.
This resulted in Valve Nos. ICA46B, Auxiliary Feedwater System pump runout protection valve and INV15B, Chemical and Volume Control System letdown containment isolation valve being undertorqued and not being able to close under all postulated conditions.
Response
4 1.
Admission or Denial of Violation Duke Power Company admits the violation.
2.
Reasons for Violation if Admitted Procedure IP/0/A/3820/11, Certification of Rotork Valve Actuators, was written using " rated" torque valves from approved vendor-supplied documents.
Station personnel were initially unaware of individual application torque requirements which deviated from " rated" torque.
3.
Corrective Actions Taken and Results Achieved a.
The valve actuator for ICA46B valve was replaced with an actuator certified to the individual application torque.
b.
A review of the Nuclear Maintenance Data Base was conducted to identify any potential problems with other Rotork Actuators.
c.
The valve actuator for INV15B valve was replaced with an actuator certified to the individual application torque.
d.
Procedure IP/0.A.3820/11 was changed to reference individual application rather than " rated" torque for all recertifications.
i f
4.
Corrective Actions Actions taken in Section 3 above ensure avoidance of further violations.
4 5.
Date in Full Compliance Duke Power Company is now in full compliance.
I I
I
-