IR 05000334/1988010

Insp Rept 50-334/88-10 on 880222-26.No Violations or Unresolved Items Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Actions on Previous Insp Findings,Configuration Mgt, Inadequate Core Cooling Sys Installation & Startup Testing

ML20154M260
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	05/25/1988
From:	Lester Tripp NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20154M258	List: IR 05000334/1988010 ML20154M256
References
50-334-88-10, NUDOCS 8806010230
Download: ML20154M260 (4)

Text

_ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,

.

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0KMISSION Region I Report N /88-10 Docket N License N OPR-66 Licensee: Duquesnc Light Company One Oxford Center 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15279 Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspector: David F. Limroth, Project Engineer ctoc Proj >ts Section No. 3A Approved By: . ,

ppj) 5/g[gg

/LowellE.Tripp, Chief

['ReactorProjectsSectionNo.3A

'

Date Division of Reactor Projects Inspection Summary: Inspection Conducted on February 22-26, 1988 (Report N /88-10)

Areas Inspected: Routine inspection by a region-based Project Engineer of licensee actions on previous inspection findings, configuration management, inadequate core cooling system installation, startup testing following refuel-ing, determination of reactor shutdown margin and plant cleanlines Results: No violations or unresolved items were identified. One NRC open item was reviewed; however, licensee action has been inadequate to close the ite PDR ADOCK 05000334 o DCD

'

.

.

.

.

DETAILS Persons Contactqd Interviews and discussions ware conducted with various members of licensee management and staff as necessary to support inspection activitie . Follow-Up on Outstanding Items (Module No. 90/01)

At the request of the resident inspector, an outstanding item (01) was reviewed with cognizant licensee personne Open Inspector Follow Item (IFI) 334/85-02-04 - Unexplained voltage shifts of RCCA F-10 RPI system during power operation. On two occasions in January, 1985, operators noted a deviat'on bet zeen control rod RPI indi-cation and the associated group demand counter indication. Troubleshoot-ing indicated that the deviation was caused by a shift in RPI prima ry voltage for the rod in question. Although the licensee was to determine the cause of the voltage shif t, no results of that determination were available during the inspection. This item remains open pending licensee investigation of the voltage shift . Configuration Management (Module No. 71707)

The inspector performed a complete walkdown of accessible portions of selected engineered safety feature systems and determined actual config-uration of components and control Control room drawings, status boards and system valve and electrical controls checklists required by licensee administrative controls to be maintained current, were reviewed to verify that actual system configuration was accurately represented. Actual valve positiun was compared with remote indication where provided; position of valves which were inaccessible were verified by remove indication where provided. Power was verified available tu remotely controlled valve Clearances (tag-outs) associated with the selected systems were similarly reviewed to assess the system's operability with respect to the pending mode change in conjunction with the completion of the refueling outag The following systems were inspected:

--

Chemical and Volume Control System

--

Auxiliary Feedwater System

-

Quench Spray System No unacceptable conditions were note i

'

.

.

2 During the course of reviewing the clearance associsted with the replace-ment of No. 4A seal injection filter, it wts noted that the filter vent valve, ICH-305 had not been tagged open in accordance with Operating Manual (OH) A.B.6.d when the isolation valves were shut and tagged on January 26, 1988. Subsequently, on February 2, 1988, the clearance was authorized to be removed including removal cf the tag and shutting of the vent valve in questio During the removal of tags, it was noted by licensee personnel that the vent had not been tagged, apparently in viola-tion of Operating Manual A.B.6, Note and Site Administrative Procedures, Chapter 41, which requires that, when vent or drain valves on any radio-active system are to be opened for any reascn, the valves must have a clearance tag posted on it as well as on any boundary isolation valves whose operation could effect the volume of water being drained. Further ir.terviews with licensee personnel indicated that the vent valve had never been opene Therefore, technically, no procedural violation occurre Personnel interviewed were aware of the requirement that the vent valve is required to be tagged open were the filter to be changed out. The inspec-tor had no further questions on this matte . Inadequate Core Cooling System Installation The inspector reviewed the installation of modification 668, Inadequate Coie Cooling Instrumentation System in order to assure that deficiencies resulting from installt. tion were being satisfactorily tracked to comple-tion, that procedural revisions necessitated by the modification had been implemented or were on schedule to be completed in time to support system operation, and that personnel had been provided training on the new instrumentatio No deficiencies were note . Startup Testing Following Refueling (Module 72700)

The inspector reviewed the results of tests associated with the reactor RTD cross calibration program, BvT (Beaver Valley Test) 1.1-1.3.1, Narrow Range RTD Cross Calibration, to verify conformance with licensee proced-ures, that results met acceptance criteria, and that deficiencies were expeditiously resolve The licensee employs a licensee developed computer program to perform cross calibration calculation The inspector reviewed this program and related sof tware to insure that administrative controls comparable to control of these documents were employed to assure that only the current approved version of the program is employed. Calculation results were spot-checked manually; no errors were found. The inspector also reviewed the input of indepencent checks performed by the reactor plant vendor; no discrepancies were note The inspector verified that these RTDs which did not meet acceptance criteria were electrically removed from the syste No discrepancies were noted.

I

e .

.

'

.

3 Determir.ation of Reactor Shutdown Maruin (Module No. 61707)

The inspector reviewed licensee records to datermine that adequate shut-down margin had been maintained during the prior six month period. This inspection included review of the licensee's procedure for shutdown margin determination for technical adequacy, review of records to verify that shutdown margin calculations had been performed in compliance with tech-nical specification frequency, that the most recent critical conditions had been accurately recorded prior to shutdown, that calculations to assess reactivity changes had been currently performed, and that the results of shutdown margin calculations met the ccnditions prescribed by technical specification No discrepancies were note . Plant Cleanliness (Module No. 71707)

The inspector conducted a comprehensive tour of accessible portions of the controlled areas inspecting for overall cleanliness / housekeeping item Large quantities of low level radioactive waste awaiting shipment remained in the primary auxiliary building; however, access to safety related sys-tems/ components was not significantly affected. The floor area in the vicinity of the spent fuel cooling system was contaminated by significant accumulation of crystallized boric aci These concerns were brought to the attention of senior management as items to receive increased attentio No items of immediate safety-related impact were note . Exit Interview (Module No. 30702)

A meeting was held with facility management at the conclusion of this inspection to discuss the inspection scope and to summarize inspection finding .