IR 05000272/1987013
| ML18093A190 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1987 |
| From: | Eapen P, Napuda G, Odar F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18093A187 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-87-13, 50-311-87-16, NUDOCS 8706300992 | |
| Download: ML18093A190 (7) | |
Text
r:.,...... _
"'7..'.') ~. 1_'._ ********** -~ ** __.... ~ **
-**
- NUCLEA~ REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No /87-13 50-311/87-16 Docket No License No DPR-70 DPR-75 Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At:
Hancocks *Bridg~. New Jersey Inspection Conducted:
May 18-22, 1987
/.-'
Inspectors:~/
G:apuaa: Lead Reactor Engineer Quality Assurance Section, OB, DRS
¥z ate Approved by:
Inspection Summary:
Announced inspection conducted May 18-22, 1987 (Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-272/87-13 and 50-311/87-16)
Areas Inspected:
Nuclear Engineering including in-plant Reactor engineering; and, QA/QC interfaces, involvement and overvie Results:
No violations were identified.
DETAILS Persons Contacted:
- R. Blake, Design Engineer-Nuclear Fuel
- D. Glassic, Reactor Engineer
- M. Gray, Licensing Engineer C. Johnson, General Manager-Quality Assurance (QA)
- D. Perkins, Manager-Station QA
- E. Rosenfeld, Manager-Nuclear Fuel
- W. Schultz, Manager-QA Programs and Audits
- D. Vito Senior Engineer-Licensing J. Zupko, General Manager-Operations Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- P. Eapen, Chief, Quality Assurance Section Other administrative, engineering, operations, technical and QA/QC management and staff were contacted during the course of the inspectio *attended the May 22, 1987 exit 1nterview Purpose The purpose of the inspection was to review the effectiveness of PSE&G 1 s quality verification organizations in identifying technical issue.sand problems having safety significance and in following up the resolution of these issues and problems to ensure that they are resolved in a timely manne.
Review of Nuclear Fuel Design/Analysis Activities The Nuclear Fuel Design and Analysis section is headed by a Section Supervisor with a degree in Physics and 15 years of experience in Reactor Engineering ~nd PWR Core Design Analysi His section includes four degreed engineers and physicists and two technical associates working toward degree In the nuclear fuel design and in technical ver.ification of the design work performed by Westinghouse, the EPRr-CELL, CPM, PDQ7/HARMONY and TRINODE computer codes are use These codes are verified using measured flux maps from various cycles in Salem 1 and Using these codes PSE&G verifies Westinghouse calculations and supports reactor operation For Cycle 8, Unit 2, PSE&G submitted to the NRC a Topical Report, NFU-0039, for reactor physics method This methodology is currently under review by NR The methodology utilizes the above mentioned computer codes and proposes establishment of FLEX-SPEC The FLEX-SPECS will permit changes in Limiting Condition~ of Operation (LCOs) each m~nth.
The primary procedure for Nuclear Design/Analysis control is contained in M2-QC.6-0 The inspector discussed with the section supervisor this procedure and other associated documents, such as, M2-QC.6-04, File Structure; and, M2-QC.6-06, Computer Contro In order to ascertain proper application of these procedures, the inspector also reviewed a sample calculation where there was a substantial discrepancy between the measured and calculated fluxe The analysis had been internally reviewed and all open items had been resolved before approval by the superviso It had been determined that the reason for the discrepancy was a drifting detecto.1 Reactor Engineering Group The Reactor Engineering Department provides technical support for plant operation It performs surveillance to ascertain compliance with TS during daily operation The procedures that they use are documented in the Reactor Engineering Manua These procedures are approved by the SOR In order to ascertain the adequacy of the implementation of the program the inspector reviewed a set of calculations made for flux mapping per Section 12 of the Reactor Engineering Manual as detailed belo A flux map is produced using neutron flux measurements from different thimbles and passe The data are taken by the incore detector system and stored by the plant compute They are then fed into the main frame computer at Corporate Headquarters and used as input to the INCORE code which calculates peaking factors (Fz, the axial factor and FdH, enthalpy hot channel factor).
ln order to ensure that the computer results are valid, the input data are checked for drift using duplicate traces, for their consistency within neighboring points and excessive backgroun External detectors are calibrated against the calorimetric powe They are also calibrated
~gainst incore detectors and incore detectors are talibrated against each othe At symmetric thimbles the values of flux integrals, axial factors (Fz) and axial offsets are calculated and compared for their consistenc The procedure for evaluation of INCORE flux map results is documented in 11Guidelines for Evaluating Incore Flux Map Results 11 *
The calculations or input data checks performed by the plant engineer are not reviewed independently by the Reactor Engineering grou However, the same measurements which have been stored by the plant computer, are used by the Nuclear Fuel Design group to calculate burnup for verification of desig Their calculations and checks provide an independent audit for the calculations and input checks performed by p rant reactor engineer ***
- .
-*~~.
.:.. -*~*'" -'-~*..
Findings and Conclusions The inspector reviewed the analyses-by the Nuclear Fuel group (Discrepancy between the measured and predicted fluxes, Calculation File 001.6 - 296) and those from the Reactor Engineering group (Flux Map 2407, Fiche No. WF14061) and the corresponding calculation performed by the Nuclear Fuel group for the same Flux ma The calculations were performed with technically sound procedures and independent reviews were mad The results were within TS limit The QA procedures which are in place, provide independent reviews and check However, in future operations (i.e., Cycle 8 and later cycles, if FLEX-SPECS are approved by NRR) the procedure should be reviewed for its adequacy since LCOs may change monthly based on measured power distribution The engineering support provided for plant operations was technically sound, completed in a timely fashion and included independent verifications for the assurance of qualit Management support was evident by the quality of personnel and level of staffin No violations were identifie.
QA/QC Involvement* and Overview Various staffing charts, schedules, plans, logs and reports were reviewed to assess the adequacy of QA/QC staf The licensee actions to assure adequate QA/QC overview of ongoing activities were discussed with licensee managemen QA/QC involvement with nuclear fuel and related work was specifically evaluated with respect to extent of overview, technical aspects of this monitoring and the effectiveness of this functio The Quality Assurance (QA) organization consists of several groups, each directed by a Manager, who report to a General Manager-Q The QA Programs and Audits group conducts audits of internal activities such as engineering and operation The QA Engineering and Procurement group audits and conducts surveillances of vendor and.other purchasing activitie The Station QA group conducts surveillances and inspections of station activities including onsite contractor Four audit packages (see Attachment A) were reviewed to verify that requirements such as checklists, timely report issuance and responses, and followup of adverse findings were implemente It was noted that technical assistance from the appropriate engineering group was used on two of those audit Checklist attributes/characteristics included system walkdowns, observation of the transfer of fuel, examination of welds, spot verification of calculations, and review of a Materials Status Report.
The surveillance and control of vendors are accomplished using the audit method and techniqu Eight such audit packages of the fuel fabricator-were reviewed (see Attachment A).
Six of these audits used one or more fuels engineering personnel and one also used contracted technical specialist Checklist attributes/characteristics included observation of ongoing fabrication and testing, checks of Doppler calculations method, fuel reactivity calculations, computer code adequacy, and reload analysis check Station QA personnel conducted surveillances of nine service and twelve operations functional areas such as fire protection, radiation protection, fuel handling, maintenance, chemistry, document.control, security, housekeeping, inservice inspections and non destructive examination Nineteen surveillance reports were reviewed and it was noted that check-lists were used in the majority of instances and the emphasis was on observation of ongoing activitie For example, the checklists for monitoring Technical Specifications (TS) surveillances/testing required at least five such activities to be observed in proces Station QC personnel are involved only with work done by station personnel such as radwaste shipments, modification inslallations, and maintenanc Hold points are usually inserted into the work procedure The inspection supervisor stays aware of activities by receiving copies of work schedules and attending the daily station meeting.
The education, experience and training of selected personnel were reviewed; and discussions and interviews were held with various employee All were knowledgeable, had received various supplementary training and displayed a conscientious attitude toward their duties. It was noted that four individuals had recently completed a systems engineer course at the licensee Training Cente The QA personnel undergoing system engineering training are now required to take the 11board 11 exam given to participating engineering personne The successful completion of the exam results in certification of these individuals as system engineers, and as the General Manager-QA explained, enhances the credibility of his personne.1 Findings and Conclusions The internal audits were comprehensive and included an adequate element of technical revie Corrective action was timely and recurrence was not eviden All audits were being accomplished in general accordance with the established schedul The audits of fuel vendors were the most frequent and conducted on an almost bimonthly schedule for the past two year They also were comprehensive and exhibited the highest use of technical assistanc Corrective action follow up was intense and the goal to reduce fuel problems was a management initiativ The surveillance of station activities has been increased and those associated with fuel were extensiv The Manager-Station QA stated that the results of this second level overview were very encouraging and the intent was to further broaden and increase this effor Inspections of work were adequate including fuel related activities even though the opportunity for involvement in this type work was limite *
The QA/QC monitoring and overview were well planned and execute Technical assistance was used liberally and necessary corrective actions were adequate and timel The support of management was evident and the assurance of quality was effective in this functional are No violations were identifie.
Management Meetings Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at the entrance interview on May 18, 198 The findings of the inspection were discussed with licensee representatives during the course of the inspection and presented to licensee management at the May 22, 1987 exit meeting (see paragraph 1 for attendees).
At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector The licensee did not indicate that proprietary information was involved within the scope of this inspectio *
ATTACHMENT A Documents and Reports Reviewed Internal Audits NM-86-09, Nuclear Fuels Department NS-86-011, Fuel Loading and QA Contractor Controls NS-86-50, Outage Support and Controls NS-86-019, Technical Engineering Vendor Audits QADVA-78-5, Salem Fuel Contracts PSBF-8, Nuclear Fuel Reload Assemblies, Region 4, Salem 1 PSCF-11, Nuclear Fuel Assemblies, Salem 1, Batch 5 PSDF-9, Nuclear Fuel Assemblies, Salem 1, Batch 6 PSFF-6, Nuclear Fuel Assemblies, Salem 1, Batch 8, Cycle 6 PSHF-04, Nuclear Fuel Assemblies, Salem 1, Batch 10, PSFH Campaign PNDF-01, 02, 03, 04 and 05, Salem 2, Batch 6 PNCF-03/PSGF-05, Fuel Design Control QA Surveillances 86-0162, 0271, 0273 163, 164 and 0269, and 0272, Fuel Receipt Inspection (Salem 2)
86-0075, 0093, 0094, 0088 and 0089, Fuel Reconstitution 86-632, 633 and 634, Fuel Shuffle 86-631, Refueling 86-299 and 353, Fuel Handling Crane Overload Test 86-630, Fue 1, Handling