IR 05000311/1981002
| ML18085B148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1981 |
| From: | Bettenhausen L, Caphton D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18085B147 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-311-81-02, 50-311-81-2, NUDOCS 8104060161 | |
| Download: ML18085B148 (6) | |
Text
I I
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION ANO ENFORCEMENT
Region I Report N /81-02 Docket No. _5=0"--..:::;3.=.11=-----
License. N~. DPR-75 Pri.ority -------
Category __
...w..._ ___
_
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Plaza - 15A Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:
Salem Unit 2 Inspection at:
Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conducted:
January 13-16, 1981 Inspectors: ~~~
L. H. Bettenhausen, Ph.D., Reactor Inspector date signed
date signed date signe ~/';
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January 13-16, 1981 (Report No. 50-311/81-02)
Areas of Inspection:
Routine, unannounced inspection of precriticality startup test data, low power physics test data and special tests by.a region-ba?ed NRC inspecto The inspection involved 23 hours2.662037e-4 days <br />0.00639 hours <br />3.80291e-5 weeks <br />8.7515e-6 months <br /> onsite by a region-based inspecto *
Results:
No items of noncompliance were. identified.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
!
> \\(q \\
8104011. ' <
- DETAILS
- Persons Contacted PSE&G C. Connor, Operations Engineer
- J. Driscoll, Chief Engineer L. Fry, Operations Engineer
- J. Jackson, Senior Reactor Staff Supervisor
- H. Lowe, QA Engineer J. Nichols, Reactor Engineer
- F. Schnarr, Operations Engineer W. Schell, Nuclear Engineer
- J. Stillman, Station QA Engineer USN RC
- L. Norrholm, Senior Resident Inspector
- denotes those present at exit interview of January 16, 198.
Pre-Critical Testing - Data Review Test results from the testing program prior to initial criticality were reviewed by the inspector to verify the following:
Test changes approved and implemented in accordance with administrative procedures; Master procedure annotated to reflect changes and completed actions; Changes did not impact the basic objectives of the test; Test deficiencies ~nd exceptions identified, resolved, and resolution accepted; Retest requirement~ completed; System or process changes resulting from test deficiencies properly documented and reviewed;
"As run" copies of test procedures contain completed data sheets, properly reviewed, signed or initialed and dated; The cognizant engineering group has evaluated the test results and signified that testing demonstrated design conditions met;
,_
Test results compared with established acceptance criteria; Approval of test results by personel charged with responsibility for review and acceptance; review and ~valuation documente The following startup tests were reviewed for this verification:
SUP 70.8, Rod Oro~ Time Measurements, released for test June 13, 1980, for cold no-flow and full-flow measurements and July 2, 1980, for hot no-flow and full-flow measurements; results reviewed and accepted by Station Operations Review Committee (SORC) and the Station Manager on July 31, 1980;
SUP 70.1, Reactor Coolant System Leakage Test, released for test July 2, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 1980; SUP 70.4, Pressurizer Spray and Heater Capability and Continuous Spray Settings, released for test July 2, 198 Seventh retest completed satisfactorily July 29, 198 Review and acceptance by SORC and Station Manager completed July 31, 198 Review of start-up procedures encompassing the Reactor Protection System and Emergency Safeguards Actuation System response, functional test; includ-ing alarm and trip functions, setpoints for low-power test program and instrument calibrations were previously documented in Inspection Report 50-311/80-1 The following test procedures were reviewed to verify that the licensee had evaluated the test results:
SUP 70.6, Rod Position Indication System, released for test July 2, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 1980; SUP 70.7, Rod Drive Mechanism Timing, released for test June 13, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 1980; SUP 70.11, Incore Flux Mapping System, released for test June 5~ 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 1980; SUP 70.3, RCS Flow Coastdown, released for test July 2, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 1980; SUP 70.5, RCS Flow Measurement, released for test July 2, 1980; reviewed by SORC and Station Manager on July 31, 198 *
Vibration. monitoring was accomplished during the hot functional testing;
- i~spection of this area is detailed in Inspection Report 50-311/79-2 No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Low Power Level Data Review Test results for the zero-power physics test program were reviewed to verify the inspection criteria stated in paragraph 2 abov The following startup tests were reviewed:
SUP 80.3B, Isothermal Temperature Coefficieht, released for Test August 2, 1980; results reviewed and accepted by SORC on October 22, 1980 and Station Manager on October 29, 198 This test results showed a positive moderator temperature coefficient (MTC)
at hot, zero power, all rods out (ARO) condition and a negative MJC at all other rod settings examine The licensee was operating under the physics test exceptions of Technical Specification 3.10.3 in this phase of testin The MTC was evaluated, a maximum withdrawal limit of 102 steps for Control Bank D or an equivalent circumstance of boron concentration less than 1265 ppm was established, the withdrawal limit of 102 steps set up, tested and found to result in a negative moderator temperature coefficien The ARO positive MTC and the consequent withdrawal limits were called to the atten-tion of all licensed operators by memo dated September 13, 198 The inspector reviewed the test data, data analysis, comparisons with acceptahce criteria and conformance to action statements of Technical Specification 3.1.1.4. The inspector pointed out difficulties in following the data analysis as presented in the test package; an engineer's review and annota-tion was in progress at the close of this inspectio SUP 80.4, Rod and Boron Worth Measurements, released for test August 2, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC October 22, 1980 and by Station Manager October 29, 198 The reactivity worth of Control Banks A, B, C, D, the worth of the Control Banks in normal overlap operation and the inverse reactivity worth of boron all met acceptance criteri SUP 80.6, Minimum Shutdown Verification and Strick Rod Worth Measure-ments, released for test August 6, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC on October 22, 1980 and Station Manager on October 29, 198 An evaluation of the reactivity worth of Shutdown Bank D measuring slightly more than the acceptance criterion (750.05 pcm measured versus 675 + 68 pcm design) was made by the reactor vendor; the evaluation was reviewed-and accepted on the bases that (1) the measured reactivity was greater than design, (2) the reactivity worth is relatively small, hence more difficult to measure and (3) the vendor's current acceptance criterion for rod worth would have been me All other acceptance criteria for the test were me SU~ 80.5, RCCA Pseudo Ejection at Zero Power, released for test August 11, 1980; reviewed and accepted by SORC October 22, 1980 and the Station Manager October 29, 198 This test met all acceptance criteri SUP 80.3c, Neutron Flux Distribution at Zero Power reviewed and accepted by SORC October 22, 1980 and by Station Manager October 29, 1980~
Flux maps 2002, taken August 5, 1980, with Control Bank D inserted and boron concentration 1193 ppm, and 2004, taken August 11, 1980, with all rods out and boron concentration 1335 ppm, met acceptance criteri Map 2003, taken Augu~t 6, 1980, with Control Banks C and D inserted and boron concentration 1083 ppm, showed an in-core quadrant power tilt slightly greater than 2%;
- the data were evaluated by the reactor vendor and the licensee and accepte The iero power physics test results,' with the evaluations of the three items not within acceptance criteria delineated above, were presented to the Station Operations Review Committee on August 20, 1980. The SORC authorized the next portion of the test program, Special Tests, to be performe *
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
Special Tests A series of special tests for various aspects of natural circulation cooling were added to the startup testing program following the low-power physics test phas The tests were run in the period August 23-29, 1980; several tests were rerun for training purpose At the time of this inspection, additional runs of natural circulation tests were needed to meet the commit-ment that all licensed operators participate in the tests. Consequently, there has been no formal review and acceptance of test dat This portion of the test program will remain open until all operators complete their trainin The inspector reviewed the available test data and test procedures to assure that:
'
Test changes were approved properly and properly annotated in the*
procedure body;
Changes did not change the basic objectives of the test; Data was recorded where required; Data and test results had received preliminary evaluatio *
The inspector reviewed the following test procedures and supporting data packages:
SUP 90.0, Special Tests Sequence Document, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.1, Natural Circulation Test, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.2, Natural Circulation with Simulated Loss of Offsite AC Power, Revfsion 2, released foF test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.3, Natural tirculation with Loss of Pressurizer Heaters, Revi-sion 2, released for test August 23, 1980; *
SUP 90.4, Effect of Steam Generator Secondary Side Isolation on Natural Circulation, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.5, Natural Circulation at Reduced Pressure, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.6, Cooldown Capability of Charging and Letdown, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 1980; SUP 90.7, Simulated Loss of All Onsite and Offsite AC Power, Revision 2, released for test August 23, 198 The inspector noted two instances where test results required further action. Licensee representatives were aware of these and stated that the test exception/deficiency mechanism would be used to arrive at resolutio The two items were inadequate lighting under emergency conditions at the auxiliary feedwater pumps and the hot shutdown panel and a deviation between test measurement and installed meter for saturation temperature which was greater than the 3°F acceptance criterion. These followup actions will be subject to future inspectio *
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
Exit Inte~view The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) on January 16, 198 The purpose, scope and findings of this inspection were presented at the meeting.