ML20210V466
| ML20210V466 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 02/06/1987 |
| From: | Merschoff E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Beckham J GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210V468 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702190026 | |
| Download: ML20210V466 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000321/1986035
Text
.
/
%
UNITED STATES
-
!"
" $,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. f
,1
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666
Q
f
-
4,,,,,
February 6, 1937
Docket Nos.:
50-321 and
50-366
Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr.
Vice President - Nuclear Generation
Georgia Power Company
Post Office Box 4545
i
Atlanta, Georgia 30302
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION INSPECTION - PLANT E. I. HATCH,
UNITS 1 & 2 - NOS. 50-321/86-35 and 50-366/86-35
Enclosed is the report of the team inspection conducted by Mr. R. C. Wilson
and other NRC representatives on November 3 to 7,1986, at Plant E. I. Hatch.
The team's findings were discussed with you and your staff at the conclusion
of the inspection. The inspection reviewed your implerentation of a program
as required by 10 CFR 50.49 for establishing and maintaining the qualification
of electric equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49. Within these areas,
the inspection consisted of examinations of selected procedures and records,
interviews with persennel, and observations by the inspectors.
The inspection determined that you have implemented a program to meet the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.49.
Five deficiencies in your program implementa-
tion, sumarized in Appendix A, are classified as Potential Enforcement /
Unresolved Items and will be referred to the NRC Region II office for further
action. One of the deficiencies involves operation of Plant Hatch Unit 2 for
at least seven mcnths after November 30, 1985 with Limitorque valve operators
whose qualificaticn was not denonstrated because they contained unidentified
and unqualified internal wiring. Three other significant deficiencies involved
failure to demonstrate that plant performance requirements were satisfied for
Okonite cable and splices, States Co. terminal blocks, and Roserount trans-
mitters; these deficiencies reflected failure to consider the impact of cable,
splice, and terminal block errors on the instrument loops in which they are
used. The fifth Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Item concerns failure to
address the qualified life of Target Rock solenoid valves, based on the
incorrect premise that EQ-related failures would always place the valve in
the same state and condition as electrical de-energization.
Two other concerns
are classified as Open Items; your actions concerning them will be reviewed
in a future NRC inspection. One of the Open Items is noteworthy because it
addresses an unusually large number of equipment installation deficiencies
observed during the plant walkdown inspection.
Details of all the deficiencies
!
and concerns are discussed in the enclosed inspection report.
go
%jl MEI EEh
i
,h
G
._
_
- _ _ - . _ - . . _ _ -
--
..
- _ _ _ - .
..
,
.
.
!
Georgia Power Company
-2-
February 6, 1987
_
Completion of your corrective actions regarding the identified deficiencies
and concerns should not be delayed pending either a future NRC inspection or
,
further action by the NRC Region II office.
We are available to further discuss any questions you have concerning this
inspection.
Sincerely,
.
Ellis W. Merschoff Acting Chief
Vendor Program Branch
Division of Quality Assurance, Vendor
and Technical Training Center Programs
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A-Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Items
2.
Inspection Report No. 50-321/86-35 & 50-366/86-35
cc w/ enclosures:
Mr. H. C. Nix, Jr. , General Manager
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant
Georgia Power Ccmpany
Pcst Office Box 442
Baxley, Georgia 31513
-
__
_
_
_
. - _
.
E
.
Georgia Power Company
-3-
February 6, 1937
DISTRIBUTION:_.... _
~ ._.. ,
tTE~lliiMeTUles;(50-321/366)
J
NRC PDR
VPB Reading
DQAVT Reading
JTaylor
RStarostecki
BGrimes
HMiller
EMerschoff
UPotapovs
RWilson
,
0Gormley
JStone
LParker
NLe, NRR
GRivenbark, NRR
JFehringer, INEL
DJackson, INEL
MJacobus, SNL
JThomas, DPC
Region II Distribution
AGibson
AHerdt
TConlon
!
ARuff
Algnatonus
NRC Resident Inspector
Route 1, Post Office Box 279
Baxley, Georgia 31513
i
!
I
i
r
0FC
- VPB:DQAVT
- SC/V
AVT :A
B DQAV
- REGION II
,
...:..____....__..:..___........_:_...._____.._
......:....__.....___..:....
.. __.
__
..
NAME :RCWilson: sam
- UPotap'ovs
- E
off
- ARJ+
l ..... :...........____.:._,__..._____.,
............:...__.........:....._________:_______....__
l DATE :2/f/87
- 1/lo/87
- 1/6 /87
- 1/f/87
l
-
-
-
-
_____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
____
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX A
.
Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Items
As a result of the special equipment qualification inspection on November 3
!
to 7, 1986, the following items have been referred to NRC Region II as
Potential Enforcement / Unresolved Items (section references are to detailed
portions of the inspection report).
1.
Contrary to paragraphs (f) and (k) of 10 CFR 50.49 and section 5.2.2
of the 00R Guidelines, during the period from November 30, 1985 until
at least July 24, 1986 the Georgia Power Company (GPC) files did not
adequately document qualification of Limitorque valve operators in
Plant Hatch Unit 2 because the plant equipment was rot identical in
design and material construction to the qualification test specimen,
and deviations were not adequately evaluated as part of the qualifica-
tion documentation; furthermore, Justifications for Continued Operation
were not in place. Specifically, wiring internal to the components
was unidentified and/or unqualified.
(Section4.F(1), Item 50-366/
86-35-01.)
2.
Contrary to paragraph (j) of 10 CFR 50.49, at the time of the inspection
the GPC files did not adequately document qualification of Okonite cable
and splices because the ability to meet specified performance requirenents
during accident conditions was not shown. Specifically, performance data
taken during the LOCA test, definition of plant electrical performance
requirements, and a comparison of the two were not included.
(Section
4.F(2), Item 50-321/86-35-01; 50-366/86-35-02.)
3.
Contrary to paragraphs (f) and (k) of 10 CFR 50.49 and section 5.2.5 of
the D0R Guidelines, at the time of the inspection the GPC files did not
adequately document qualification of States Co. terminal blocks because
the ability to meet specified performance requirements during accident
conditions was not shown. Specifically, definition of plant electrical
performance requirements and comparison of test data with then were not
included.
(Section 4.F(3), Item 50-321/86-35-02; 50-366/86-35-03.)
4.
Contrary to paragraphs (f) and (k) of 10 CFR 50.49 and section 5.2.5 of
the 00R Guidelines at the time of the inspection the GPC files did not
adequately document qualification of Rosemount transmitters because the
ability to meet specified accuracy recuirements during accident conditions
was not shown.
Specifically, transmitter accuracy calculations and
comparisons with plant requirements did not include errors fron other
equipment such as terminal blocks located in harsh environments.
(Section
4.F(4), Item 50-321/86-35-03; 50-366/86-35-04.)
5.
Contrary to paragraph (j) of 10 CFR 50.49, at the time of the inspectirn
the GPC files did not adeouately document qualification of Target Rock
solenoid valves because the qualified life of the equApment was not
determined. Specifically, the clain that the valves would " fail safe"
.-
-
-,
.
_-
.
j
.
-2-
.
was not suppcrted because the files did not contain sufficient design
information to support a failure analysis or to show similarity between
installed and tested equipment; furthermore, the qualified life could
also not be determined from information in the files because the quoted
120F normal ambient temperature did not include allowance for heat
generated by solenoid coil operation or for heat transferred from
the process fluid.
(Section 4.F(5), Item 50-321/86-35-04; 50-366/
86-35-05.)
,
1
)
/
-
---
-
- - - -
_ _ . -
. _ _ . _ _ .
_
_ _
,_,
___
,
_