IR 05000280/1981021
| ML18139B593 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/19/1981 |
| From: | Burnett P, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18139B589 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-81-21, 50-281-81-21, NUDOCS 8111050522 | |
| Download: ML18139B593 (4) | |
Text
,_'
"
e e
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-280/81-21 and 50-281/81-21 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Faci 1 ity Name:
Surry Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 Inspection at Surry Site near Surry, Virginia Inspector : S,t/, f u}~-tz:;;:;;-_L,f-H. L. Whiten er Approved by: ~~3v:--
P. T. Burnett, Acing Section Chief Engineering Inspection Branch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY Inspection on July 3-8, 1981 Areas Inspected rU!q/~I Date Si§ned cfi9/ij Date Signed This routine, unannounced inspection involved 60 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of initial plant heatup, precritical testing and low power physics testing, subsequent to a prolonged shutdown of Unit 1 for steam generator replacemen The inspection included observation of tests, review of test procedures and review of test results for a sample of the required testin Results Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations wire identified in two areas; one violation was found in one area (Violation - failure to approve a change to a procedure prior to implementing the change (280/81-21-01) paragraph 6).
- Persons Contacted Licensee Employees e
- J. L. Wilson, Station Manager REPORT DETAILS
- R. F. Saunders, Assistant Station Manager G. E. Kane, Operations Superintendent
- D. A. Christian, Superintendent of Techincal Services
- L. J. Curfman, Supervisor of Performance Engineering Other licensee employees contacted included shift supervisors and control room operator Other Organizations Stone and Webster
- M. Reyno 1 ds L. Budlong D. Esielionis
NRC Resident Inspector
- 0. Burke, Sr. Resident Inspector M. Davis, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 8, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 abov.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspecte.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio.
Thermal Expansion The inspector reviewed the thermal expansion procedure and the test dat The procedure contained the essential elements such as system walk downs at each temperature plateau to identify interference; recording of identified
- *
data points; approva 1 by a stress engineer prior to preceding to next plateau; and, predicted expansion values for selected point Preliminary evaluation of the expansion data was performed by Stone and Webster stress engineers and found acceptable. The final expansion data for the main steam and feedwater lines will not be available until heatup to full power opera-tion is complete However, preliminary data at hot standby temperature indicates these lines are free to expan Some interference problems were identified during system walk downs at temperature plateaus. These problems were evaluated and resolved prior to continued heatup. Problems and resolu-tions are documented in a test lo At the exit interview the inspector stated that, based on the field evaluations and explanation of anomalous data by the stress engineers, he had no problem with continued plant opera-tio However, in that some of the predicted movements were not in close agreement with actual piping movement the inspector asked the licensee to obtain a final study and summary stress evaluation report from Stone and Webster which identifies the differences, gives the bases for the differ-ences and establishes the reasonableness of the number The licensee stated that this matter will be considered. This matter is identified for followup inspection (280/81-21-02).
Testing During the inspection the inspector witnessed and/or reviewed test results for portions of a number of pre-critical and zero power tests. Examples of tests witnessed and/or reviewed included:
ST-111 ST-117 PT-28.11 PT-7 RCP Coastdown Pressurizer Spray and Heater Checkout Zero Power Test range Operational Checkout of Reactivity Computer Rod Worth Using Dilution/Boration Technique Rod Drop Time The inspector had no questions with the exception of pressurizer heater performance (ST117) and boron concentration sampling during rod worth measurements using boron dilution (PT 28.11 Appendix E).
In that 200 kw of heater capacity was out of service during the heater performance test due to breaker problems, test results did not meet the acceptance criteri The 1 i censee accepted the test results-based on a calculation which showed that the heating rate would be acceptable with restoration of the inoperable capacity. The resident inspector will follow breaker repai Step E.3.2. of PT 28.11, the procedure for measuring the rod and boron worth using the boron dilution technique, requires that boron concentration be determined from samples taken at 15 minute intervals from the reactor coolant system and at 30 minute intervals from the pressurizer. During the
e e
reactivity worth measurement of control bank B the licensee established the initial boron concentration but did not take samples at 15 and 30 minute interval The inspector agreed with the licensee 1 s evaluation that the test data were valid without the interval sample data as long as the initial and final boron concentrations were obtaine However, the procedure PT28. ll step E.3.2 was changed without prior approval by the designated superviso Technical specification 6.4.E allows procedure changes to be made provided such changes are approved prior to implementation by the designated persons; in this case the cognizant supervisor and a licensed ienior reactor oper-ato This matter was identified as a violation at the exit interview (280/81-21-01).