IR 05000298/1990027
| ML20055J232 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1990 |
| From: | Murphy M, Seidle W, Singh A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055J231 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-298-90-27, NUDOCS 9008010226 | |
| Download: ML20055J232 (5) | |
Text
_
.
..
..
..
.
.
.
..
...
...
..
.
...
w-
.
.
.
'
.
APPENDIX
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV-
,
NRC Inspection Report:
50-298/90-27 Operating; License:'DPR-46'
Docket: 50-298 Licensee: HebraskaPublicPowerDistrict(NPPD)
)
P.O. Box 499 Coluiabus, Nebraska 68602-0499 l
Facility Name: CooperNuclearStation;(CNS)
Inspection At: CNS, Brownville, Nebraska Inspection Conducted: July 9-13, 1990 Inspectors:
7 the)
j A. Singh, Rda$: tor Inspector, Test Programs Date-Section, Division of Reactor Safety 4.
J~
1/i+ho i
M. E. Murphy, Re%ctoKJnspector. Test Programs 08te '
Section, Divisi of Re ctor Safety i
l Approved:
&>
(4A-7 2d
g.
. Sei e, Chief, Test Programs Section D[te /
,
'
Di sion of Reactor Safety
!
Inspec ion Sunnary Inspection Conducted July 9-13, 1990 (Report 50-298/90-27)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the licensee's startup testing,
~
following refueling and followup on corrective actions for violation and a deviation.
Results: Within the area inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
,
The licensee's startup testing following the Cycle 13 refueling outage appeared to generally be in conformance with the Technical Specifications (TS) and the established licensee's procedures. One weakness was noted which appeared to be the misinterpretation of the licensee's comitment in response-to a deviation identified during a previous inspection (50-298/88-18).
9008010226 900724 l
'
PDR ADOCK 03000298
.
O FDC
.,
I
-
.~
.
-
-
..
-
_ -__
,
...
.
.
'
'
.
.
,s
'
'
J[
.
- ..
.
,
,
'
'
.,
,.
'
'
,
,
.
DETAILS l
,
1.. PERSONS' CONTACTED
' N_ PPD
.
- L..E. Bray, Regulatory Compliance Specialist
- RL Brungart, Operations Manager
'*J.-Flaherty, Engineering Manager
.
!
- R. L',' Gardner, Acting Senior Manager of Operation's
- J. Meacham Division Manager of Nuclear Operations
'
<
- C. R. Moellen, e : ting Senior Manager of Staff Support SerUices.
- S.:M. Peterson, Senior Manager of Technical Support Services
- J. Thompson, Lead Reactor Engineer-l
- M. Unruh, Maintenance Manager J
.
NRC
,
T. McKernon, Reactor Inspector, RIV
- Denotes those attending the exit interview on July 13, 1990.
'
'
2.
FOLLOWUP ON CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONSLAND DEVIATIONS' 92702 (Closed)LViolation(298/8817-01):- Failure to follow containment integrated..
,
leakratetest-(CILRT)-procedures-Thisviolationinvolvedpersonnelerrorun;
-'
that an individual replaced valve caps-.and repositioned the valves to the normal cherating position without reading integrated. leak rate test g een, tags, or checkingswith the shift supervisor. During.this! inspection, the' inspectors reviewed the procedures, which included the incorporation of:second: verification j
to the. containment integrated leak rate test procedure. ' Also, the. licensee: had revised the industrial safety training lesson plan to: place more emphasis on
the use of the green tags. The inspectors reviewed the training. documents
.which indicated that the revised lesson plans-had been' incorporated intolthe-t l
industrial safety training program. The inspectors'found this. acceptable and.'
-
this item is considered closed.-
,
3.
STARTUp TESTING - REFUELING -(72700)
'
The purpose of this inspection was to verify that startup testing.f0110 wing.the'
i
~
- Cycle 13 refueling -outage (beginning of Cycle.14) was in accordance with NRC
'
. requirements and licensee procedures. During this inspection, the inspectors t
reviewed the-vendor core design report and reactivity control systems, power
,
distribution limits, and instrumentation sections of;the Technical Specification.
-The, inspectors then reviewed the licensee. procedure'and test results related to.
-startup and core physics testing during cycle 13 operation. The review? included verification'of test results for control rod drive and control rod position-
- )
indication checks, which included periodic control rod drop timing..and. reactor
'
"
-
thermocouple / resistance temperatureidetector cross calibration. The other-
<
procedures and test results evaluated are listed in the Attachment.
a
'
,
-
-
_., -
_
_
-
._
.
__.
-__ _ _____ -_ __.
_.
__.
._
.
_.__
__ _ ___
.-
.
l
-3-The inspectors verified that the stated procedural objectives were met, acceptance criteria for tests were met, changes to procedures and tests were
~
satisfactorily reviewed, approved and incorporated ~. The test deficiencies were satisfactorily dispositioned.
In reviewing the qualifications of the test personnel who evaluated, reported, and approved the results of NPP 10.9 test procedure, the inspectors noted that no specific criteria existed for determining and certifying the qualification status of test-personnel.
It was further noted, that a deviation on the same
,
itemwasidentifiedinNRCInspectionReport(50-298/88-18).
In response to the above deviation in a letter dated August 16, 1988, the licensee stated that NPP 10.9 would be revised to include an appropriate prerequisite identifying the cualifications (training) necessary for test performance. Procedure 10.9 Step 7.2 was revised to state that, " Procedure review must be performed by a Station Nuclear Engineer." But the response to the NRC in the licensee's j
August 16, 1988, letter stated that, " Nuclear Performance Procedure 10.9 will
.
be revised to include an appropriate prerequisite identifying the qualifications (training) necessary for performance." The licensee was informed of the misinterpretation of their commitment. The licensee toos prompt corrective action and initiated a procedure change to incorporate the specific criteria l
and the qualification for test personnel. The inspectors reviewed the proposed l
change and found it acceptable. Additionally, the inspectors did not identify any instances in which the misinterpretation of this commitment by licensee had
-
caused a problem.
3.1 The purpose of this part of the inspection was to verify the following:
The local power range monitor system had been properly calibrated to the
i local neutron flux.
The average power range monitor system had been properly calibrated to the core thermal power.
The calculations of core thermal power were performed correctly.
The intermediate range monitors had been properly calibrated.
To verify-these objectives, the inspectors reviewed the procedures listed in the Attachment to this report.
The procedures were found to be technically accurate..The calibrations and associated thermal power evaluations were completed at the required intervals nnd deficiencies were appropriately resolved. Results were reviewed, approved, and documented in accordance with the licensee's. approved procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.2 Surveillance of Core Power DistributCan Limits (61702)
This part of the inspection was conducted to verify that the plant was being operated within the licensed power distribution limits. To verify this objective, the inspectors reviewed the procedures listed in the Attachment.
!
-
-
.
.
-
t= c f -.. o
.
'
i
,
,
-4-T The-data reviewed were well within the predicted values for core thermal power
.
limits. The data reviewed were at the 50 percent power plateau. The data were
-
!.
reviewed to: determine that alarms, error messages or other inprocess messages l
were resolved; verify that the transversing incore probe (TIP) data had been obtained after normalizing the detectors and that all data had been accepted by I
the computer; and verify that each time the computer had recovered from an outage, OD-15 " Computer Shutdown and Outage Recovery Monitor," had been implemented.
.
Through discussions with the reactor engineering staff, the inspectors determined that the staff was knowledgeable about the computer codes' limits and capabilities.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.3 Determination of Reactor Shutdown Margin (61707)
The inspectors reviewed this area to determine that the licensee would have an adequate shutdown margin throughout the operating cycle. The inspecters reviewed the Cycle Management Report for Cooper Station, Cycle 14 and the procedures listed in the Attachment to this report.
The inspectors verified that the shutdown margin procedure was-technically accurate and that the determination of the beginning of cycle shutdown margin
,agreeo with the Technical Specifications limit. The licensee had utilized the.
' recommendations of the fuel vendor in conducting the control rod withdrawal movements. Discussions with.the reactor engineering staff indicated that the licensee had reviewed the data supplied by the fuel vendor. The procedure utilized to periodically check the amount of shutdown margin available during
,
power operations was also found to be technically accurate.
There were some minor editorial errors identified in Procedure NPP 10.16. The inspectors reviewed these errors with a licensee representative, and the errors will be corrected in the next revision of Procedure NPP 10.16. The errors did not adversely affect the test performance or data collection.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
EXIT'lHTERVIEW The inspectors met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on J
July 13, 1990, and summarized the scope and findings of this inspection. The licensee identified proprietary information provided and reviewed.by the inspectors. The information was returned to the. licensee and was not used in this inspection repor._
_
_
._
,_ _
__
___
,
.
....,.
.
-
l
.'
l
'
ATTACHMENT l
Procedure No.
Title Date HPP 10.1 Average Power Range Monitor 4/27/89:
Revision 22 (APRM) Calibration.
NPP 10.2 Intermediate Range Monitor
_3/15/90" Revision 15 g L(IRM)-Calibration-
.,
-
NPP 10.3..
Core Thermal Power Evaluation 4/26/90 Revision 9.
a NPP 10.4'
Control. Rod Drive Friction-Test 5/25/89-Revision 0 NPP 10.5 LocalPowerRangeMonitor(LPRM)*
_1/11/90
'
Revision 24'
Calibration'
SP 6.1.19 LPRM Calibration IP/15/88
>
Revision 10
-
HPP 10.7 Core Thermal Limits,
4/6/90 Revision 11 e
_.
.
NPP 10.9 Control Rod Scram Time Evaluation 3/12/90 L
Revision 18-
,
NPP 10.13 Control Rod' Sequence:and Movement'
1/31/90 Revision 19 Control'
i NPP 10.14 Program 00-15 Utilization 9/6/89 Revision 0 NPP 10.17 NSSS Cycle Data Update-9/23/88-Revision 5
.
.,
NPP 10.19L Guide for OD-l' and OD-2 Utilization 1/5/90'
Revision-10 L
SP 6.2.4.1 Daily Surveillance Log 3/2/90I-Revision _66-(Technical-Specification)-
'
SP 6.4.1.3 CRD Coupling Integrity Check-10/13/88 Revision 8
<
NPP 10.8 Reactivity Follow Check 11/9/89 L
Revision 12 HPP 10.15 TIP Reproducibility-and Core Power -
3/22/89 Revision 6 Sy metry Test -(Beginning of Cycle)
s NPP 10.16 Shutdown liargin Evaluation 8/17/89.
Revision 18
,
,-
4