IR 05000322/1981018
| ML20032B624 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1981 |
| From: | Higgins J, Kister H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20032B618 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-322-81-18, NUDOCS 8111050727 | |
| Download: ML20032B624 (7) | |
Text
-
-
.
'
,
U.S.~ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-322/81-18 Docket No. 50-322 License No. CPPR-95 Priority Category B
--
Licensee:
Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801
.
Facility Name: Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection at: Shoreham, New York Inspection conducted: September 1 - October 19, 1981 Inspectors:
b
/0!23 h/
J/C. Hi(gdns, Senior Resident Inspector date signed date signed
,
date signed Approved by:
8m
/P/.17/h' /
fi. B. Kister, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1C date signed Projects Branch #1, DRPI Inspection Summary:
, Inspections on: September 1 - October 19, 1981 (Inspection Report No. 50-322/81-18)
Areas Inspected: Routine onsite regular, backshift, and holiday inspections by the resident inspector (115 inspection hours) and a regional supervisor of work activities, preoperational testing, and plant staff activities including: tours of the facility; test witnessing; review of test procedures; review of plant staff training; witnessing of CRDM installation, review of RCIC operation; and followup on previous inspection findings.
Results: No violations were identified.
Region I Form 12 (Ro. April 77)
fjR O!ObO$22 O
G PDR
..
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted J. Bengtson, Training Supervisor (NUS)
D. Durand, Lead Startup Engineer (L)
T. Gerecke, Quality Assurance Manager (L)
J. Kelly, Field QA. Manager (L)
S. Kepler, Site Manager (RCI)
W. Matejek, Lead Advisory Engineer (S&W)
,
B. McCaffrey, Manager, Project Engineering (L)
M. Milligan, Project Engineer (L)
J. Morin, Senior Licensing Engineer (L)
J. Notaro, Operating Engineer (L)
R. Reen, Site Security Supervisor (L)
J. Riley, Lead Startup Engineer (GE)
J. Rivello, Plant Manager (L)
T. Rose, Acting 0QA Engineer (L)
W. Steiger, Chief Operating Engineer (L)
D. Terry, Assistant Startup Manag)er (L)
E. Youngling, Startup Manager (L GE - General Electric L
- Long Island Lighting Company RCI - Reactor Controls. Inc.
S&W - Stone and Webster NUS - NUS Training Corporation The inspector also held discussions with other licensee and contractor personnel during the course of the inspection including management, clerical, maintenance, operations, engineering, testing, quality assurance and construction personnel.
2.
Previous Inspection Item Update (open) Unresolved Item (322/81-02-05): FSAR Conformance: The licensee's Architect Engineer (Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation) has completed their review of the program used to achieve conformance between licensing documents, such as the FSAR, and actual system design documents. The study concluded that no significant or generic differences existed between the documents in question. The study also evaluated six discrepancies identified by NRC inspectors and provided some type of resolution. The inspector met with licensee representatives to discuss the study and requested that the licensee evaluate an additional 15 discrepancies identified since the study had been initiated. Another meeting was scheduled to review the additional discrepancies and to reconsider the generic question of FSAR conformance based on the results of this review. This item remains open.
- - -
.
.
.
-
.
.
,
t
-
-3-(open) Unresolved Item (322/81-04-05): Transformer Tap Settings: The inspector had asked for information or analyses to justify the setting of the taps on the two offsite power transformers (NSST and RSST) at Tap #3,
- .
since that tap setting was producing 4KV bus voltages currently between
.
4300 and 4400 volts. The licensee provided the inspector with the AC Station Service Study, dated 1/30/81, which was performed to ensure adequate
_
voltage for operation of safety-related equipment. One conclusion of the study was that during lightly loaded refueling conditions the station service transformer taps may have to be manually lowered to prevent high voltages on
the 4KV buses. The inspector reviewed plant procedures and administrative
-
controls and noted that there was currently no provision for limiting high voltages or for lowering transformer tap settings durino lightly loaded conditions. This item is unresolved and remains open.
(closed) Unresolved Item (322/B0-03-02): 125V DC Preopvational Test:
-
The inspector had originally noted that the tests PT.315.001 A, B & C did E
not comply with Regulatory Guide 1.32, paragraph C.b in that they did not E
require the battery chargers to supply maximum steady state DC loads
'
(irrespective of plant status), while recharging the battery from the design
minimum charge to fully charged in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The licensee reviewed the battery bank loads, specified 60 amps as the maximum steady state load, E
and performed the tests using 60 amos as an additional load on the battery chargers. Upon review cf the loading, the inspector noted that the 60 amp
=
value was not large enough to account for all accident loads. on the A Battery, but was sufficiently large for the B and C Batteries.
For the A Battery, s
an additional 34 amps were needed.
Post-test analysis of data for the A k
-
Battery showed that there was sufficient additional battery capacity available, beyond that used to meet the test acceptance criteria, to easily accomodate
'
j the additional 34 amps needed. Therefore the battery chargers are considered
-
to have met the rsquirements of R.G.1.32.
Also with this unresolved item,
[
the inspector haj noted that the cest procedure allowed significant negative
-
tolerances which, if utilized, would result in testing the batteries at shorter E
times and lower load values than the batteries' design bases. These negative
-
tolerams, however, were not used during the tests' performance. This item is closec
_
,
(clewd) Unresolved Item (322/80-13-03): DC Instrumentation: This item was
,;
reviewed and accepted by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation as documented on nage 8-1 of Supplement No. I tc the Shoreham Safety Evaluation
!
Report (SER).
DC bus voltace is recorded for each DC bus on a control room back panel.
DC bus undervoltage is alamed locally, on the control room I
'
computer, and as one of five remote inputs to the control room Battery Charger
_
Trouble Annunciator.
This item is closed.
i; 3.
Plant Tour
,
e f
a.
Discussion w
The inspector conducted periodic tours of accessible areas in the plant k
during nomal, backshift, and holiday hours.
During these tours, the Jl
following specific items were evaluated:
--
i T
r
_
' -
E E
..
E
'
.
-4-
-- Hot Work: Adequacy of fire prevention / protection measures used.
-- Fire Equipment: Operability and evidence of periodic inspection of fire suppression equipment.
-- Housekeeping: Minimal accumulations of debris and maintenance of required cleanness levels of systems under or following testing.
-- Equipment Preservation: Maintenance of special precautionary measures for installed equipment, as applicable.
-- Component Tagging:
Implementation and observance of equipment tagging for safety, equipment protection, and jurisdiction.
-- Logs:
Completeness of logs maintained.
-- Security: Adequate site construction security.
-- Reactor Vessel:
Special controls established to maintain cleanliness conditions within the reactor vessel.
-- Weld Rod Control: Observations to determine weld rod was being controlled in accordance with site procedures.
With the exception of the below item and those in paragraph 7, no discrepancies were identified.
4.
Training The inspector met with the newly appointed Training Supervisor from the NUS Training Corporation and discussed the current training plans, including:
Operator Cold License Proficiency Training, Shift Technical Advisor (STA)
Training, and General BWR Orientation Training. The inspector noted that the Cold License Program now contains some aspects of the required post-TMI operator training outlined in the following:
- Letter from H. Denton to all applicants and licensees dated 3/28/80 and titled " Qualifications of Reactor Operators";
- NUREG-0737, Item I.A.2.1: and
- LILC0 Letter to the NRC number SNRC-579.
The inspector reviewed the lesson plans and attended train ~,ng sessions of control room operators and STAS in the below areas:
- Heat Transfer and Thermodynamics, and
- 4160 volt Emergency Bus System and 480 volt Emergency Cas System.
Lesson plans and instructor presentations. appeared adequate and student comprehension was appropriate for the time in the courses. !!o unacceptable conditions were identifie.
-5-5.
Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDV) Installation As part of the final construction installation activity for the Reactor Vessel, the 137 r ntrol Rod Drive Mechanisms are individually transported e
to the under vessel area, raised into position, and bolted in place. The inspector reviewed the installation instructions contained in General Electric Document No. 22 A4112, Rev. O, " General Instructions for Reactor Assenbly",
and observed portions of the installation process for several CROMs.
Portions witnessed included:
- Quality Control inspection of CRDMs prior to installation,
- Transportation to under vessel area on CRDM removal cart,
- Rotation and raising of CRDM's with the mechanism winch,
- Inspection and installation of gaskets and 0-rings,
- Installation of the uncoupling rod,
- Torquing of CRDM bolts, and
- Recording of appropriate serial numbers versus installed location.
The inspector noted that selected installation requirements were being met, that installation personnel appeared qualified,and that Quality Control personnel were actively observing the process.
No discrepancies were identified.
6.
Drywell Floor Seal Pressurization System a.
Documentation The inspector reviewed the following documents:
-- Preoperational Test PT.654.005-1, "Drywell Floor Seal Pressure Monitoring System",
-- F5AR section 3.8.1.7.1,
-- Piping and Instrumentation Drawing FM-55A and pertinent E&DCRs,
-- System Description for Primary Containment System,
-- Completed Checkout & Initial Operation (CSIO) tests for the system motor operated valves, relief valves,and instruments.
- -
- --
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
_ _.
o
.
-6-
'
b.
Discussion The inspector observed the installed system, including piping, valves, components, and instruments.
Based on the document review and the system tour, the inspector compared the as-built plant and approved test procedures to licensee commitments and regulatory requirements. The inspector also myiewed completed C&IO tests to determine if appropriate acceptance criteria had been met. No discrepancies were identified.
c.
Test Witnessing The inspector witnessed portions of PT.654.005-1 including valve lineups, completion of prerequisites, demonstration of system pressure control, and operation of system instruments and control room alarms.
During the test the inspector noted that:
- the test procedure was approved and released for performance by the JTG;
- test procedure was in use by personnel performing the test;
- test equipment was calibrated within required time periods;
- test personnel were suitably qualified;
- quality assurance participation was as required;
- data was logged per the procedure; and
- test acceptance criteria were met for portions observed.
7.
Steam Condensing Mode The Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system has a mode of or * ration called the Steam Condensing Mode which is used for plant cooldown.
In this mode steam is taken from the reactor vessel by the High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI)
steam line piping and sent to the PHR heat exchangers for condensatien and cooling. The condensate is then returned to the reactor vessel by the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) system Pump, The RHR system operating procedure, S.P.23.121.01, step 8.1.8.11,0 cautions that in this mode the condensate to the RCIC pnp must not exceed 140 F or 45 psig. The manufacturer's technical manual or the pump and the General Electric System Design Specification Data
.
Sheet, #22A1354AW, Rev. 4, both specify a maximum water temperature of 140 F for the RCIC pump. The inspector noted that there is no installed temperature instrumentation in the RHR heat exchanger outlet or RCIC pump suction line which could provide the operator with the water temperature, in order to ensure that the 1400F limit is not exceeded. The item is unresolved and is designated as item no. (32z/81-18-01).
.. -.. -
- -..
, - - - -
- -,
. -
-. - - - - -
-
. - _.
_
..
..
-7-8.
Unresolved Items Areas for which more information is required to determine acceptability are considered unresolved. An unresolved item is contained in Paragraph 7 of this report.
9.
Management Meetings At periodic intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were
held with plant management to discuss the scope and findings of this inspection.
The resident inspector also attended the exit interviews for two inspections
'
conducted by region-based inspectors during September.
Additionally, the resident inspector attended a meeting on September 30, 1981 of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACPS) subcommittee reviewing the Shoreham application for an operating license and on October 15, 1981 attended a meeting of the ACRS full committee to consider the Shoreham application.
E i