IR 05000354/1985018

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Rept 50-354/85-18 on 850416-19.No Violations Identified.Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Procedure Review & Verification,Preoperational Test Witnessing & Preoperational Test Results Evaluation Review
ML20128B065
Person / Time
Site: Hope Creek PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 05/18/1985
From: Alba A, Bettenhausen L, Briggs L, Gaudino M
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20128B048 List:
References
50-354-85-18, NUDOCS 8505240396
Download: ML20128B065 (8)
v • d • e


Text

c,

~

.

,

_

%

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report-No. 50-354/85-18 Docket No.

50-354 License'No. ;CPPR-120 Priority Category B

--

Licensee: Public Service Electric and Gas Company

'80 Park' Plaza - 17C

,

Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name: Hope Creek Generating-Station Inspection At:.Hancock's Bridge, N'ew Jersey Inspection Conducted: April l'6-19, 1985

~

l Inspectors:

+s'egy 9 /[8['

-

E. Briggs, Lg%VReactor Engineer date

$$b Y^ 6

.5Y/6VW PW'Gaudi'no, Reactor Engineer date

$ $ A b b-h 3~bWW A. Albai Reactor Engineer date Approved by:

IMIstIci M/fAS LT Bett'enhausen, Chief date Operations Branch, DRS

' Inspection Summary:

Inspection on April 16-19, 1985 (Report No. 50-354/85-18)

-Areas' Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection (53 hours6.134259e-4 days <br />0.0147 hours <br />8.763227e-5 weeks <br />2.01665e-5 months <br />) by three region-

~

-

based inspectors of preoperational test procedure review and. verification, pre-operational test witnessing, preoperational test results evaluation review \\

system turnover /SDR review, QA/QC interface with preoperational testing and plant tours.

Results: No violations were-identified.

k$h354

.

PDR

.

,-

y

-

.

i DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted J. Androzzi, SDR Coordinator / Group Leader

  • A. Barnabei, Principal Quality Assurance (QA) Engineer
  • J. Cicconi, Startup Manager
  • W. Cole, Lead Site QA Engineer
  • J._Cox, Principal Startup Engineer
  • R. Donges,.QA Engineer
  • R. Donnellon,' Hope Creek Operations (HCO) Maintenance C. Fresh, Startup Methods Coordinator.
  • A. Giardino, Manager QA, Engineering and Construction
  • W. Goebel, QA Engineer (Bechtel)
  • N. Griffin, Project Field Engineer (Bechtel)
  • R. Griffith, Sr., Principal QA Engineer A. Indigo, Principal Test Engineer
  • C._Jaffee, Startup Engineer
  • A. Kao, Principal Engineer, Site Engineering
  • S. LaBruna, Assistant General Manager, HC0
  • E. Logan, Site Manager R. Magill, Component / System Turnover Coordinator
  • M. Metcalf, Principal QA Startup Engineer
  • A. Meyer,-Startup Engineer l
  • G. Moulton, Project QA Engineer (Bechtel)
  • W. Mourer, Construction Manager _(Bechtel)
  • G. Owen, Principal Site Engineer, Construction Department
  • J. Rucki, HC0 Maintenance
  • D. Sakers, Assistant Project Construction QC Engineer (Bechtel)

'*M. Shedlock, HC0 Maintenance D. Smith, Startup Engineer (Station Service Water System)

J. Stevens, Startup Engineer ~(Main Steam System)

Other NRC Personnel

  • A. Blough, Senior Resident Inspector S. Chaudhary,-Senior Resident Inspector, Construction
  • Denotes those present at the exit meeting conducted on April 19, 1985.

2.0 Preoperational Test Procedure Review and Verification 2.1 PTP Review and Verification The PTP's listed in Attachment A were reviewed in preparation for test witnessing, for technical and administrative adequacy and for verification that testing is planned to adequately satisfy regulatory guidance and licensee commitments. They were also reviewed to verify licensee review and approval, proper format, test objectives,

,

i j

-

.

.

prerequisites,- initial conditions, test data recording requirements and system return to normal.

2.2 - Findings

- During review of PTP-BB-2, Reactor Recirculation System the inspector noted that -the low speed stop for the recirculation pump motor generator (RPMG) was being set at 30 percent speed. The Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Chapter 7, Paragraph 7.7.1.2.2.3.7 states that the low speed stop will be set at 20 percent speed.

This item was

. discussed with the licensee. General Electric Revision Status Sheet, Reactor Recirculation System - 22A2916AE, was subsequently provided to the inspector.

The revision ' status _ sheet stated that the - low speed stop was to be set at 30 percent as stated in PTP-BB-2. The licensee agreed to submit a FSAR change request to correct the FSAR.

This item will be reviewed during_ a future routine inspection.

During the review the inspector also discussed a previous item identified during inspection 50-354/85-06 (paragraph 2.2) concerning automatic supply of RACS cooling-water to the emergency instrument -

air compressors on a loss of power without a loss of coolant accident.

PTP-ED-1 did not agree with-the FSAR but did agree with actual plant design. The licensee ' has issued FSAR change notice No.

849 to correct this item.

No' unacceptable conditions were identified.

3.0 Preoperational Test Witnessing

,

Testing witnessed by the inspector included the following observations of overall crew performance:

Approved. procedure with latest revision available and in use by test

--

personnel; A designated person in charge and conducting the test;

--

Minimum test personnel requirements met;

--

-- ' Qualified personnel performing the test;

_ Test precautions followed and prerequisites met;

--

QA/QC hold and witness requirements met (QA engineer present);

--

Proper plant supporting systems in service;

--

Special test and measuring equipment required by the test procedure,

--

its calibration and use;

_

-,,

.

-

-_

.

,

3.;

L

-

.

-

..

Procedure.is technically adequate for the test;

--

~

Testing' being performed ' as required by the test procedure; _ and,

--

Test personne11 ' actions ; appeared ~ to be correct and timely. during-

--

performance
of,the test.

F

.

..

The_-inspector.' observed a portion'of the performance of.preoperational test-procedure (PTP) BB-2,--Reactor: Recirculation System on April-18 and -19, 1985.

.On April 18, when-the:' licensee attempted to start. the

'A'

-recirculation pump.the ; field breaker (CBIA) tripped 1to the " trip' free" position. ~In place testing of the bre'aker produced the same result. - The

. system test engineer entered - a test exception -(Number.12). and initiated,

-

Startup Deficiency Report (SDR) number 88-481 to test and repair 'the ibreakert Bench. ' testing 'of the.' breaker did. not. indicate any problem.

=

The. breaker was reinstalled and, tested satisfactorily. :The. initial-

~'

. problem was determined ' to be a result of the ' breaker not beingf fully cracked into the cubicle. Subsequent testing was proceeding in accordance

,

-.with l the procedure.

The inspector reviewed the outstanding test excep-

-

~tions and the completed portion of the in. progress test procedure The

.

inspector also observed continuous QA/QC coverage of a'ctivities.

No unacceptable conditions were observed.

,

~4.0' Preoperational Test Results Evaluation Review 4.1 --Scope w

-

-

Theitwo completed test procedures listed below were reviewed during 1this inspection to verify that adequate testing had been conducted to

-

satisfy regulatory guidance, licensee-commitments and FSAR require-

$

ments and to verify that uniform criteria.are being applied for evalu-ation of completed test results in order to' assure technical and ad :

ministrative adequacy.

-The inspector reviewed the test results and verified the. licensee's

~

>

-

evaluation of test. results _ by review of test-changes, test excep-~

~

,

tions, test deficiencies, "As-Run" copy of test procedure, acceptance criteria, performance verification, recording _ conduct of test, QC

-

'

inspection. records, restoration of system to normal af ter test,.in-dependent; verification of critical steps or parameters, identifica -

tion.of personnel - conducting and evaluating test data, and verifica-

'

,

_

tion that the_ test results have been approved.

~

PTP-PB-1, ' 4160V. Class. IE Power System, Revision 1, Approved-1--

April'12, 1985 and

PTP-PJ-1, 250 VDC E Class 1E. Power System, Revision 1, Approved

.

-

--

1 April 4, 1985.

,

p i.

<

,

,,v.

. - - +

c.

,.,.,.., -

w,,,.;n..,n-.v_,,,._.-e.,,

..n.

n.

..,-.,n,

,.-,_,e,,

c,,,

-,,,-,,-nn--

.

.

__

_

_

-

-

'

..

!-

'

'4.2 Test Exceptions

- No unresolved discrepancies or violations were identified in the above - review.

PTP-PB-1 was completed with no open test exceptions, PTP-PJ-1 has three open test exceptions.

The licensee has a consolidated tracking system which is used to im-plement corrective action for all work items' at the facility and is administratively controlled. by. SAP 10, Startup Deviation Report (SDR) Program.

The above test exceptions have been assigned SDR numbers PJ-0026, PJ-0033 and PJ-0129.

The open SDR's. require 11-censee closeout and collectively constitute unresolved item 354/85-18-01.

The inspector _also noted that the licensee has established a computer tracking system that lists all PTPS, their approval and progress status as'well as any open test exceptions and the corresponding SDR-number.

This system should be a valuable asset to the licensee by

. promulgating the preoperational test program status to appropriate managementpersonnel.

-No unacceptable conditions were identified.

L5.0 System Turnover /SDR System Review 5.1 Scope

"

The inspector reviewed several component / system turnover (C/ST) pack-ages to verify conformance with licensee procedures.

Specifically, the. review involved examining Turnover Exception lists to determine that all open Turnover Exception List items were assigned to a Start-up Deviation Report (SDR) and that the SDR's which were initiated were in compliance with administrative procedures.

The C/ST packages reviewed were:

Feedwater AEC-01(F)

--

Residual Heat Removal BCA-01(F)

--

Service Water EAA-01(F)

--

---

Emergency Diesel Generator (Gen-D) KJA-01(F)

Main Steam ABA-01(F)

---

5.2 References / Requirements Startup-Administrative Procedure (SAP)

No.

5, Facility,

--~

Component / System Turnover and Jurisdictional Tagging, Revision 7 SAP-10, Startup Deviation Report Program, Revision 8

--

,,

Fs v.

~J g

' -

g gr<

,

p 6-

,

,

'

,

s

,

,

b

-

'

5.3; Findings-

.

-

'The~ review ' consisted.off verifying that the above C/ST packages met

,

the criteria festablished by the Startup Administrative Procedures

'

'

'

'

L(SAP)Tlisted above. LTh6 SDR's which-were initiated for open items on F theiturnover exceptions -list -had been completed according to a_dmini-

~

>

' strative : procedures..However, according to Paragraph 4.2.8 of SAP _-

t No. 5, sTurnover. Exception List.open -items should -be initiated into

"

~ 1the SDR system-within/ 7 working days. Several. SDR's were noted as.

beingfinitiated-overla month.~after the system was-turned over..The!

~

-

inspector held discussions with-the system engineers in charge. of initiating the SDRS.

The discussions ~ made it apparent that: the

,

problem was due.to the large quantities of SDR'_s which must be initi-

Tated upon system. turnover. The problem was -brought to the attention iof: the. SDRf Coordinator and the Startup Methods Coordinator.. The li-

-

^

censee.was aware of the _ apparent problem in this area.

During_ dis-n

~

'

"cussions later in the week (April 19,.1985) the SDR Coordinator in-formed. the. inspector that he had - just learned from the principal

'

engineer that.this problem had been recognized by management and that

'

as.of April :1,' 1985, Bechtel Construction would be responsible for

,

initiating :SDR's prior to" system turnover. The system: engineer will

'

.

still have. the responsibility of verifying that SDR's are' correct.

SDRs; appeared to _ be trended according to ' administrative - procedure-through the' System Test Engineer, Startup _ Manager and - QA/QC. =It is

-

,the SDR Coordinator's; responsibility to ensure the SDR is complete-

-

-

prior.to issuance of an SDR number from the' Startup Methods Coordin-

'

,

ator.

Amreview of othe current turnover list which is generated by

'

"

-

the Component / System Turnover Coordinator was reviewed. After cross checking lthe above' packages with the_ current turnover list it became

+

. apparent.that-the date when the SDRs were listed as all assigned for

,

a Esystem.,was. in _ error.

Some packages reviewed had all their SDRs assigned weeks"before the date listed.

The problem was1 brought toe

.

the attention to -the Component / System Turnover Coordinator. The.Co-

'

ordinator stated that the date was in error due to the fact that many times-SDRs fare Lissued without a' copy being sent to him. The problem

'

~

lwas' administrative but the inspector recommended to the coordinator je '

,

-

-

.

- that usome: method ~ should be established so that the coordinator is

'

. made; aware of all -SDRs completed.

Bechtel construction should al--

4',

leviate;this problem as well by initiating the SDR's.

'

,.No. violations were identified.

-

.

6.0jQA/QCIn'terfacewiththePreoperationalTestProgram

.

1The inspector e reviewed several recent - QA Startup surveillance reports

. (QASR) regarding different activities of the licensee's startup group.

.The following QASR's were reviewed:

s

,

A h h

? --

...

g

.

.

- -'

'

-

,

QASR-1945, M0V 1-HV-2234 functional test (service water),. conducted.

--

March 15, 1985.

The QA inspector noted opening and closing times

-

- were 62.76 and - 62.96 seconds. respectively.

Required time' was 60 seconds. This was documented on General Test Procedure (STP)-8 as' a

test exception in accordance with the procedure.

QASR-2058, 'Su'rve111ance of ' A' channel testing of 4.16 KV, PTP-PB-1,

---

conducted on March :26, 1985.

The.QA inspector identified several administrative -deficiencies and =one qualitative data deficiency.

These deficiencies.were appropriately ' resolved between QA and ' the test engineer.

QASR-2158, SDR-KJ-0451 verification,. completed on. March 29, 1985.

--

-

The - QA inspector verified Emergency diesel -Generator. speed switches

_

were. installed.per Work. Order.85-03-29-037-5.

The QA inspector also noted that traceability of switches was indeterminate because there

.were no unique identificatio'n numbers on the switches. This QASR is open pending resolution.

No' violations were identified.

7.0 Plant Tours

.The inspector made several tours of various-areas of the facility to observe work.in progress, housekeeping, cleanliness controls and' status of construction and preoperational test activities.

-No unacceptable conditions were noted.

8.0 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance -

'or a' deviation. An unresolved item is identified in paragraph 4.2.

m

~

9.0'. Exit Interview A management meeting was held at the conclusion of the inspection on April 19, 1985, to discuss the scope and findings as detailed in this report.(see Paragraph I for attendees). No written information was - pro-vided to the licensee at any time during the inspection.

.

,M^

k

5:.

.

.t

,,-

,

.

A Attachment-A Preoperational Test Procedures Reviewed

'PTP-BB-4, Reactor, Pressure Vessel Internals Vibration Test, Revision 0,

. March 15, 1985 PTP-QB-1,-Essential and Standby Lighting, Revision 0, January 15, 1985

.

-PTP-GQ-1, Intake Structure HVAC, Revision 0, October:25, 1984 PTP-AP-1,' Condensate Storage and Transfer, Revision 0, September 5, 1984 PTP-GB-1, Plant Chilled Water, Revision 0, March 29, 1985 PTP-QJ-1, Freeze Protection and Heat Trace, Revision 0, February 14, 1985 LPTP-BB-2, Reactor Re../culation System, Revision 0, March 15, 1985 PTP-DA-1, Circulating Water and Cooling Tower System, Revision 0, March _29, 1985.

PTP-QF-1, Inplant Communications, Revision 0, January 24, 1985

~PTP-RJ-1, Plant Computer. System (CRIDS

'A','B' and NSSS), Revision 0, January 25, 1985.

.

,

w w

-'

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000354/1985018&oldid=4262311"