IR 05000250/1982003
| ML20041F690 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1982 |
| From: | Fiedler R, Jape F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041F687 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-82-03, 50-250-82-3, 50-251-82-03, 50-251-82-3, NUDOCS 8203170301 | |
| Download: ML20041F690 (3) | |
Text
.
'o,,
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
g r
REGION li
o 101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o
.....
Report Nos. 50-250/82-03 and 50-251/82-03 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33101 Facility Name:
Turkey Point Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Nos. OPR-31 and DPR-41 Inspection at Turkey Point site near Homestead, Florida Inspector:
/h m
/ # - 81 R. 'L. F i ed>e r Date Signed Approved by:
MM N
/7
'
-
F. Jspe, Section Chief //
/
Date igned Engineering Inspection Franch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY Inspection on February 2-5, 1982.
Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 24 inspector-hours on site in the areas of review of preoperational test procedures for testing to be performed on Unit 3 prior to returning Unit 3 to operation following the Steam Generator i
Repair Program and; a tour of the control room, the auxiliary building and the j
Unit 3 containment building.
Results Of the two areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
i
.
8203170301 820222 DRADOCK05000g i
_
n
2 REPORT DETAILS 1.
Person Contacted Licensee Employees
- H. E. Yaeger, Site Manager
- J. K. Hays, Plant Manager - Nuclear
- T. Essinger, Assistant Manager, QA A. Abbott, Startup T. Coste, QA Other licensee employees contacted included several operators.
NRC Resident Inspector
- R. Vogt-Lowell
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 5, 1982 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee representative committed to include appropriate acceptance criteria in the preoperational test procedures.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Review of Preoperational Test Procedures The inspector reviewed the preoperational test procedures which are included ir, the Integrated Startup Test Program to be completed prior to returning Turkey Point Unit 3 to operation following the Steam Generator Repair Program. The procedures reviewed were draf ts and therefore had not received final review or approval. The following procedures were reviewed:
Preoperational Procedure 0800.1, " Hot Functional Test Sequencing Document" Preoperational Procedure 0800.9, " Steam Generator Thermal Expansion Test"
.
.
.
Preoperational Procedure 0802.1, " Post SGRP Reactor Heatup - Cold Condition to Hot Shutdown Cor.ditions" Preoperational Procedure 0802.2, " Post SGRP Reactor Cooldown - Hot Shutdown to Cold Shutdown Condition".
The above procedures were reviewed to verify the following:
a.
That the objectives of the procedures were clearly stated.
b.
That the procedures contained pertinent prerequisites.
c.
That the procedures contained adequate precautions and lim'.
tons.
d.
That the procedures contained appropriate acceptance criteria against which the test will be judged and was clearly identified.
e.
That the procedures contained appropriate references.
f.
That the procedures contain adequate step-by-step detailed instructions necessary to assure that test objectives are met.
The procedures appeared adequate with the following exception.
The procedures did not contain adequate acceptance criteria.
This matter was discussed with a representative of the startup group and was also discussed during the exit interview on February 5, 1982.
The licensee committed to include adequate acceptance criteria in the procedures. This item will be inspected durinq a future inspection (IFI 250/82-03-01).
6.
, ur of the Control Room, Auxiliary Building and the Unit 3 Reactor Building A ti ar of the accessible areas was conducted to determine by observation that plant conditions and activities were in accordance with applicable requirements.
Within the areas inspected, there were no violations or deviations identified.