IR 05000311/1979018
| ML18079A452 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1979 |
| From: | Bettenhausen L, Caphton D, Fasano A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18079A451 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-311-79-18, NUDOCS 7906250478 | |
| Download: ML18079A452 (12) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Raport No. 50-311/79-18 Docket No. 50-311
..;;..;;;......;;;..;;...;.._ __ _
License No. CPPR-53 Priority ------
Category ---=B...:...l ___ _
Licensee:
Public Service Electric & Gas Comgany 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Statton, Unit 2 Inspection at: Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conducted: March 13-16 and 20, 1979 Inspectors: If H. }l:,JlL h
L. H. Bettenhausen, Reactor Inspector e
a.4 i~4=
A.. N. F~ct~
Inspector fl.fl,~~
H. ~ctor Inspector Approved~.}l ~
D. L. Caphton, Chief, Nuclear Support Section No. 1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
.
ate signed L///s/ 7 2
~t?
signed 1-/;3/?J
.
date ISign1ed *
td~'9:.t Inspection on March 13-16 and 20, 1979 ('Report No. 50-311/79-18)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of the preoperati.onal test program, including test proce..:.
dure review, verification, and test results evaluation, and the start-up test program, i-ncluding test procedure review and verification for initial criticality, low power testing and power ascensio The inspec-tion involved 88 inspector-hours on site by three NRC regional based inspector Results:
No items of noncompliance o~. de~iations were identifie Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
7 906250 tf 7 g
DETAILS Persons Contacted S.,.Chawaga, Principal Staff Engineer J. Ciccone, Senior Construction Engineer R. Griffith, Site QA Engineer T. Hamblin, Test Engineer C. Johnson, Startup Engineer A. Meyer, Site QA Engineer E. Meyer, Project QA Head
- H. Midura, Manager - Salem Generating Station
- J. Nichols, Reactor Engineer E. Roscioli, Senior Reactor Staff Supervisor W. Schell, Engineer
- J. Stillman, Station QA Engineer C. Timm, Engineer
- J. Zupko, Chief Engineer The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel during the inspectio *denotes those present at the exit interview of March 16, 197.
Preoperational Test Program Test Procedure Review and Verification The following procedures were reviewed for technical and admi ni strati ve adequacy, and to verify that adequate testing is planned to satisfy regulatory guidance and licensee commitments:
. SUP 10.3, Revision 0, Approved February 16, 197 Boron Recycle Process SUP 10.4, Revision 0, Approved March 3, 1979. Test of CVCS Makeup Blends SUP 7, Revision O, Approved February 27, 197 Control Air Systems SUP 6.c, Revision 0, Approved February 27, 197 No. 2 Station Air Compressor Automatic Startup i
- Inspector review determined the above procedures to be consistent with regulatory requirements, guidance and licensee commitment No discrepancies were noted in the review of these procedure Test Results Evaluation The fo 11 owing procedures were reviewed to ascertain whether uniform criteria are being applied for evaluating completed preoperational tests to assure their technical and administrative adequacy:
SUP 50.14, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 11, 1979. Auxiliary Feed Pump Performance SUP 50.4, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 11, 1979. Incore Thermocouple-RTD Cross Check *
SUP 15.2, Revision 0, PORC Approved February 6, 1979. Safety Injection Accumulator Test SUP 17.3, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 9, 197 Fuel Handling Tools and Fixtur~s SUP 41, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 9, 197 Generator Stator Cooling SUP 31. lC, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 9, 197 C Alarms and Auxiliaries SUP 31.2A, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 9, 197 A Diesel Operational Test SUP 31. 28, Revision 0, PORC Approved January 9, 1979. 28 Diesel Operational Test SUP 31. 2C, Revis ion 0, PORC Approved January 9, 197 C Diesel Operational Test SUP 20.3, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 12, 197 Safeguards System Operational Test
- SUP 28, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 9, 197 Energizing Electrical Buses - General SUP SO. 10, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 3, 197 Steam Generator Drains and Slowdown - Hot SUP 50. 15, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 8, 197 Control Room Inaccessibility SUP 50.0, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 9, 197 Hot Functional Test SUP 38, Revision 0, PORC Approved March 9, 1979. 115 Volt Control System The inspector reviewed the test results, and verification of licensee evaluation of test results, by the following methods:
Review of all test changes; Review of a 11 test deficiencies; Review of test summary and evaluation; Review of 11 As-run" copy of test procedures; Review of QA inspection records; and, Verifying that the test results have been approve No discrepancies were noted in the review of these procedures and the inspector had no further questions at this tim.
Startup Test Program Test Program Review The startup test program, the Phase III Plant Operational Test Program, is described in the FSAR and the Salem Startup Manua The sequence of operations and testing is described in Startup Procedure 80. 1, NSSS Startup Sequenc The sequence of tests, conduct of tests, interfaces between test engineers and station operating departments, administrative and operational controls for the startup test program, establishment of acceptance criteria, and control of test and measurement equipment were discussed with licensee representatives as they
pertained to the segme~ts of th~ test program reviewed during this inspection. The overall startup test program will be the subject of a future inspectio No items of noncompliance or deficiencies were i dent i fi e Initial Criticality Procedure Review The inspector reviewed Startup Procedure SUP 80. 2, Initia*l Criticality, to ascertain that the procedure to be use9 for initial approach to criticality was consistent with regulatory requirement Acceptance criteria and guidelines used for this review included the following:
FSAR~ technical specification, and specific license provisions (as applicable) were incorporated;,
Procedure reviews and approvals were performed in accordance with the licensee 1 s administrative controls; Procedure format was consistent with ANSI Nl8.7 and accepted practices; Prerequisites were listed to include NI calibrations satisfactorily -completed with acceptable minimum count rate and signal to noise ratios, identification of systems required to be operable, special test equipment identified, initial status required on reactor protection system, initial conditions required for each measurement were specified, and the status of temporary jumpers and leads was addressed; Appropriate personnel and equipment precautions were -
incorporated; Initial and expected control rod patterns at criticality were identified; Specific acceptance criteria were incorporated to provide predicted and/or regulatory limits to be compared with measured results;
Requirements to maintain inverse multiplication plots during the dilution of initial criticality; Provisions to ensure adequate data is taken;
. Appropriate precautions were included to provide startup rate 1 imits, dilution rate limits, increasing nuclear power after initial criticality is established, boron sampling frequency, thermal power (flux) limits, reactor coolant average temperature limits and limits for stopping RCS boron dilution during the approach to *initial criticC!lity; Provisions were incorporated to verify acceptab 1 e ov.erlap exists between the source and intermediate ranges; and, Controls were established to provide for significant delays or interruptions in testin *
The procedure was reviewed by the Station Ope rat i ans Review Committee (SORC) in Meeting 79-13 and approved by the station manager on March 9, 197 SUP 80.2, when employed with station Operating Instructions, appears to meet the criteria stated abov Pen-and-ink changes to clarify a step and correct a minor discrepancy in RCS temperature were initiated by the.* 1 icense The inspector has not further questions regarding this
- procedur Low Power Test Procedure Review Startup Procedures SUP 80.4, Rod and Boron Worth Measurements during Boron Dilution and Addition, and SUP 80.5, Rod Control Cluster Assembly Pseudo Ejection at Zero Power were selected for review by the inspector for the criteria listed in Paragraph 3.b. abov Both of these procedures were reviewed in SORC Meeting 79-11 and approved by the Station Manager on March 6, 197 Both procedures appeared to meet the stated criteria. The inspector had no further questi ans regarding these procedure *
The inspector also reviewed the following low power test procedures to verify that each of the tests was adequately covered by the procedure, that management approval was accomplished in accordance with established Ti censee *procedures, and that the test objectives were consistent with the test titles:
,
SUP. 80.3a, Boron Endpoint Determination, approved March 6, 197 sup-80.3b, Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement, approved March 6, 197 SUP 80.3c, Neutron Flux Distribution at Zero Power, approved March 6, 197 SUP 80.6, Minimum Shutdown Verification and Stuck Rod Worth Measurement, approved March 6, 197 SUP.80.7, Startup Adjustments of the Reactor Control System,,approved March 6, 197 In SUP *30.6, the test objectives indicate that the reactivity worth of only two RCC shutdown banks is to be measure However, the startup sequence, SUP 80. 1 and employment of SUP 80.6, results in measurements yielding reactivity worths of all four shutdown control banks as required in the FSA The other startup procedures have test objectives consistent with test titles and FSAR descri~tions and have received management approval. The inspector had no further questions in this are Power Ascension Procedure Review The following startup procedures from the power ascension portion of the Phase III test program were' selected for review by the inspector for the criteria listed in Para-graph 3. b. above:
SUP * 81. 11, I ncore Excore Detector Ca 1 i brat ion, approved March 9, 197 SUP 81. 12A, Alignment of Process Temperature Instrumentation, approved March 9, 1979.
--.
. --
SUP * 81 ~ l.28, Statepoi nt Data Co 11 ect ion, approved March 9 > 1979..
SUP 81~12C, Intermediate and Power Range Channel High Voltage Setting Verification, approved March 9, *
.. 197.
. SUP 82.6, Loss of Offsite Power, approved March 6, 197 SUP 82.9, Generator Trip from 100% Power, approved March 6, 197 SUP's 81.11, 81.12A, 81.128, and 81.l2C have as their overall objective the calibration of.nuclear and plant process instrumemtation. This information, together with in-core flux maps obtained in accordance with the Salem Reactor Engineering Manual, Unit 2, at power 1 eve l p 1 a tea us of 30%, 50%, 90%, and 100%, wi 11 be used in off-1 i ne computer analyses to compare with NSSS vendor predictions found in WCAP 9374, "The Nuclear Design of the Salem 2 Nuclear Power Plant Cycle Acceptance criteria for peaking factors, critical boron con-centration at 100% power and equilibrium xenon, and thermocouple vs. movable detector data are presented in SUP 80. l, NSSS Startup Sequenc The inspector had no further questions on this method of evaluation of core performance at this tim SUP 82.6, Loss of Offsite Power, is a transient test to be conducted at approximately 10% power. The object of this procedure includes the requirement to demonstrate the capacity of the primary and secondary plant systems to accept a loss of off-site power and bring the plant to Hot Standby conditio The testing program and startup procedures, as they relate to the plant operating instructions appropriately used, was discussed with the licensee. The test program and, in particular, this test procedure was reviewed for demonstration of the following:
(1) Automatic transfer of plant power loads (2) Automatic start of diesel generators (3) Automatic load of diesel generators
(4) Turbine bypass system operational (5) Operation of power~operated relief valves and bypass valves (6) Maintenance of temperature and pressure relationships to prescribed tavg (7) Control of the steam generator level to prescribed value The procedure addressed precaution that must be addressed to assure a safe and meaningful tes The test procedure requires the following conditions:
(1)
Normal operating temperature and pressure at an output between 10 and 20%
(2) Trip of the plant off electrical power to demonstrate transfer to Diesel Generator power (3) Data collection to allow for equipm~nt performance examination (4) Verification of plant load pickup (5) Restoration of plant to normal by use of facility-procedures The licensee has agreed to evaluate a more~direct use of Emergency Instruction I-4.9, Blackout, in performing this test procedur In this procedure, test instrumentation (a Visicorder) is connected to measure rod drop time as one of the test objectives. Neither the test procedure nor the NSSS Startup Sequence calls for removal of the test equipmen This is another specific example of an inspector concern expressed in discussion of several procedures. It has been considered an Open Item pending further review and discussion with the licensee regarding his procedures for installing, removing and determining status of special test equipment, particularly as it may affect next or past tests (311/79-17-02).
SUP 82. 9, Generator Trip from 100% Power, has as its *
objective the demonstration of the capabi 1 ity of the plant systems to accept a generator trip from 100% power and bring the plant to a stable condition.
. In addition to the criteria for Paragraph 3. b., this test procedure was reviewed for the following:
(1) Turbine overspeed operation*
(2) Maintenance of*secondary pressure within established 1 imits (3) Pressurizer level maintenance (4) Pressure data relatable to power actuated relief valves (5) Operations of the pressurizer safety valves and spray valves (6) Reactor temperature/pressure relationship (7) Steam Generator transients (8) Plant Electrical load transfers The procedure was reviewed for conditions that provide for:
(l) Recording of data during transients to steady state (2) Trip initiation by the main generator output breaker (3) Surveillance of equipment for unusual performance (4) Verification of plant electrical loads in final excepted condition (5) Restoration by use of normal facility operating procedures Discussion with the licensee confirmed that data will be available to determine the time lapse between the opening of the main breaker and a reactor trip for this test. The licensee initiated pen-and-ink changes to this procedures to include overspeed values that would require operator action to trip the turbine if automatic trips fail to ac *
The following test procedures were reviewed for conformance of purpose* as reflected in the S_a 1 em FSAR and within the approved test procedure:
SUP 81.3, Turbine Overspeed Trip Test, approved March 9, 1979 SUP 82.2, Large Load Reduction Test, approved March 6' 1979 SUP 82.4, Rods Drop and Plant Trips, approved March 9' 1979 SUP 82.5, Shutdown from Outside the Control Room, approved March 6, 1979 SUP 82.7, Steam Generator Moisture Carryover Measurement, approved March 6, 1979 Test procedure SUP 82. 4, Rod Drop and Pl ant* Trip, requires placement of recorders but does not address the final status required for the attached equipmen This is another example of the previously identified generic open item. regarding removal of test equipment or restoration of systems (311/79-17-02).
Test procedure SUP 82. 5, Shutdown f ram Outside the Control Room, is adequate to meet commitm~nts in the Salem FSA It does not meet current Regulatory Guide
.1.68.2 standards in Salem's* SER, Supplement N,
December 1978. This is an open item for future inspection
- pending the reso 1 ut ion of 1 i censee negotiation for compliance to recommendation contained in RG 1.68.2 with respect to this test (311/ 79-18-01).
The other procedures reviewed meet their test objectives and the purposes stated in the FSA No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this revie..
'
t 12 Pl ant lour lhe -inspector toured the Unit 2 Control Room, auxiliary building and turbine building with attention mainly directed to stations which would be used in conduct of tests, such as hot shutdown panel, auxiliary feedwater controls and turbine control No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during this tou.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection on March 16, 1979, inspectors met with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1). The findings of the inspection were discussed during the exit meetin The inspector expressed concern for the quality of review by the Station Operations Review Committee of the startup test procedures. The sources of this concern were many references to Unit 1 equipment in the Unit 2 startup procedures, references to inappropriate or obsolete revisions of documents and difficulty relating operating or emergency instructions to the test procedure A s i mi 1 ar concern was expressed by inspectors reviewing operating and emergency instructions (Inspection Report 50-311/79-08).