IR 05000302/1990022
| ML20055H577 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 07/06/1990 |
| From: | Belisle G, Taylor P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055H576 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-90-22, NUDOCS 9007270019 | |
| Download: ML20055H577 (4) | |
Text
_7..--_.,7--.,~
, - r.-
^~
,
,
'
jM
.\\
,
_.,
a.
,
>
-
m-
.-,
'
j
'E gm,.' e
.#
i;
'
pa nso
..
,
.
UNITE 3 ST ATES.-
.
'
'
ng#o,
.
' NUCLEAR REGULA10RY COMMISSION j'4 i
t i
,
'
,
,
f
-
REGION il
' ~ '
t :
g f
1101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
" >
'
,t
f ATLANTA, OEoRGI A 30323
,
i jj
/-
s
<.....
-
q
,
.
h
',t
,
g
,
.
>
.. ~
.
..
'
Re' port No :50-302/90-22-Licensee:
Florida Power Corporation
e 3201 34th Street, South, d
~St. Petersburg, FL 33733 j
Docket No.:
50-302
- License No.:. DPR-72
'
,
' Facility Name: Crystal River 3-Inspection Conducted: Jupe 12-16, 1990 i
II/#M Inspector:
HeV
-
fatpigned.
t PM.' TafTUf
~
'
,
Approvedby:/
N
/awh
d Z#O l
GM. 'BemTe,~ Chief
/'-
pteygned Test Programs-
.
Engineering Branch..
Division of Reactor Safety
,
'
SUMMARY.
,
}
Scope:
This routine, ~ announced -inspection was-conducted in the' areas of review and (
witnessing integrated engineered safeguards (ES)= and-loss of offsite power (LOOP) tests.
EEsults:
R
,
iIn-the areas-inspected, one violation vas identified but is not being cited.
--l-Inadequate-procedure steps (SP-417) contributed to the reactor building':"--
'e
-
emergency cooling fant(AHF-1C) not being in its required position for ES
'
. actuation'duringES/ LOOP. test, Train"B"(paragraph 2c)
r This licensee identified violation-is.not.being cited because criteria.
specified in section V.G.1'of the NRC Enforcement Policy were satisfied.
'
>
i'
n
.
9007270o19 poo7,9
'
{DR ADOCK 05000302 PDC
- ,.
- L,
,
,g.
a
-
[i
.
>,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contactef
- Licensee Employees
- G.- Boldt,J Vice President, Nuclear Production M._Fitzgerald, Supervisor, Nuclear Engineering Services
- R. Fuller, Senior Nuclear Licensing Engineer
- G. Halnon, Assistant Nuclear Shift Supervisor
- H.'Koon, Superintendent, Nuclear' Maintenance
- W. Marshall, Superintendent, Nuclear Operations
!
.
L
- P. McKee,~ Director, Nuclear Plant Operations
!
l
- D. Porter, Nuclear Shift Supervisor
- F. Sullivan, Manager, Nuclear Systems Engineering Other licensee. mployees contacted 'during this inspection included
engineers, operators, technicians, and administrative personnel, j
NRC Resident Inspector-
- P. Holmes-Ray, Senior Resident Inspector L
'* Attended exit. interview L
2.
IntegratedES/LOOPTest-(61701)
'l L
l a.
Procedure Review
~ The inspector reviewed SP-417, Integrated Plant Response To An ES Actuation, Revision 28, dated June 13, 1990 to verify the following:
L Appropriate levels of management review and approval had been
.-
l conducted.-
The design change (MAR 88-05-24-01)~ requirements which i
reassigned selected ES loads to new load blocks and times were l
verified to be tested during conduct of SP-417.
'
,
b ES components. pumps, and ventilation fans required to go to
['
their emergency position during ES actuation with a loss of offsite power were identified in the test steps of the l
procedure.
'
SP-417 contained prerequisites, initial system conditions and
!
l precautions to be established prior to conducting the test.
Acceptance criteria provided were qualitative or quantitative as i.
appropriate.
l l
-
-.
-
-
.N
p
.g,,
f
'4
!
,
q
-
...
,
,
_
.
+
t
'V L
o <,
i-
'I The: inspector's comments to SP-417 were presented to the -licensee I-and resolved prior to the tests.
J l
b.-
Test Witnessing
-
u
.
- SP-417 was perfoimed on June 16, 1990.- Prior' to the test. - the l
licensee conducted a briefing with plant operators, engineers and
,
electrical technicians assigned to assist in:the performance of the i
'. integrated ES/ LOOP test. The briefing was held in a conference room.
'
l with the Shift Supervisor leading the discussion. The briefing was a h
comprehensive review of the test procedure ~ and covered, in detail, duties and responsibilities required of test personnel, data l
acquisition, the operating sequence of-plant systems, and responses to be expected during the test.
The inspector observed plant operators establishing prerequisites and j
initial conditions for testing Train
"A" engineered safeguerds.
,.
systems and EDG-1A.
These activities, as well as test equipment'
-
L l
calibration, were reviewed on a sample basis to verify that procedure requirements were being met.
The testing of Train "A" started with an ES actuation consisting of a
'
building pressure signal (30 PSIG)gnal (4 PSIG), high-high' reactor reactor building high pressure si l
and a simulated loss of offsite
.
L power to the 4160 volt eme'rgency bus.
A review of test results indicated that ES equipment achieved their emergency positions and assigned load blocks, load shedding from the emergency buses had occurred, and the permanent a connected'and auto-connected emergency
~ loads to the EDG 1A did not exceed Technical Specification requirements of 3248 KW.
~The observed load on the EDG-1A 'was approximately 2000 KW.
In addition, one of.the new ES logic features was also tested during SP-417.
This feature simulated olarge break -
LOCA signals (RCS pressure 500 PSIG) andsverified that the decay-heat'-
removal pump (DHR-1A) starts and' the emergency.feedwater pump-(EFP-1)
.
tripped off. The results of this test were satisfactory.
<
Following ES/ LOOP testing of Train "A", Train "B", ES systems were aligned and the ES/ LOOP test was performed. The test results for the Train "B" ES systems ' indicated satisfactory responses. The observed load on the EDG-1B_ was approximately 1750 KW.
It was noted during the first portion of the Train"B" ES/ LOOP test that air handling fan (AHF-1C) did not indicate sequencing on after the 4 PSIG reactor building high pressure signal was initiated.
A check at the ES cabinets indicated that AHF-1B had been selected.
The selector switch was placed in the AHF-1C position and the response of the fan and its KW load was verified during the ESF/ LOOP portion of the test.
,
The licensee's review indicated that SP-417 procedure steps, wnich aligned the air handling units, did not adequately address switch positions for the test and permitted AHF-1B to be selected. AHF-1B
-
l
'
.
-
-
-
..
.J 1
.
+
.
-
.
%~ m
.3
.
,
.d.
e was out of service for maintenance.
The inspector concluded that the.
,
inadequate procedure steps (SP-417 steps 4.4.17.4.2, 4.4.17.4.3, and
4.4.31) was a licensee identified violation.
During the exit interview, the licensee stated the following actions were planned or in progress:. Issue a memorandum to the operations groups, discussing.
the identified procedure problem, and initiate a change to SP-417, identify the procedure problem so root cause analysis can be conducted through the Human Performance Evaluation System.
The-inspector had no further question in this area.
3, Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on June 16, 1990, with those-persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the' areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed below.
Proprietary information - is not contained in this report.
Dissenting.
,
comments were not received from the licensee,
!
Inadequate procedure steps (SP-417) contributed to the reactor 1l
-
building emergency cooling fan (AHF-1C) not being-in its required-.
position-for ES-actuation during ES/ LOOP tests, Train "B" (paragraph-lj
,"
l 2c).
I
'
The licensee identified. violation is-not be cited because criteria
-
specified in section V.G.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy were satisfied.
- !
l
[
!
!
.,;
.
l
.I
,
l
l-j l
l h
,
I l.p
!
,
a
_
--.
.
.
.
- -
.
.
-