IR 05000354/1986021

Insp Rept 50-354/86-21 on 860312-21.No Violation Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Results Review Evaluation,Power Ascension Simulator Training & Qa/Qc Interface W/Preoperational Test Program

ML20203F154
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	04/16/1986
From:	Briggs L, Eselgroth P, Marilyn Evans, Florek D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20203F152	List: IR 05000354/1986021 ML20203F146
References
50-354-86-21, NUDOCS 8604250054
Download: ML20203F154 (9)

Text

.

.

.

-.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

. Report N /86-21 Docket N License N .CPPR-120 Category B Licensee: Public Service Electric & Gas Company 80 Park Plaza Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name: Hope Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection Conducted: March 12-21, 1986

^ Inspectors: tugu/) t/lf/pf, l'. B 'ad actor Engineer d e

~ ~))) Il h&

D. Flore Lead Reactor Engineer pate AW l'/ 'l 4 ff G

- /V M. Evans R4attor Engineer 'date Approved by: . f/#/7f

'date P.Eselgrpth,ChiefTestProgramsSection, 08, DRS Inspection Summary: Inspection on March 12-21, 1986 (Inspection Report No. 50-354/86-21)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by three region based inspec-tors of followup of licensee actions on previous inspection findings, preopera-tional test results review evaluation; preoperational test witnessing, power ascension simulator training, QA/QC interface with the preoperational test program, independent verification, preoperational test procedure verification and plant tour Results: No violations were identifie NOTE: For acronyms not defined refer to NUREG-0544 " Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms."

h (

,

_-

.

.

.

.

.

DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted

• J. Carter, Startup Manager

• R. Donges, Lead Quality Assurance (QA) Engineer

• J. Duffy, Supervising Engineer

• N. Dyck, RCT Chairman

.

• M. Farschon, Power Ascension Manager J. Galamback, Instructor

• A. Giardino, Manager, Station QA, Hope Creek

• Goebel, Lead Site QA Engineer

• R. Griffith, Principa' QAE

• C. Jaffee, Startup Engineer

• P. Kudless, Maintenance Manager

• S. LaBruna, Assistant General Manager, Hope Creek Operations

• C. Lambert, Principal Engineer

• Mermeistein, Licensing Engineer

• Metcalf, Principal QAE

• Meyer, Senior Staff Startup Engineer

• Moulton, Project QAE

• Salvesen, General Manager, Hope Creek Operations

• Vondra, Operating Engineer Other NRC' Personnel

• R. Borchardt, Senior Resident Inspector

• J. Lyash, Resident Inspector The-inspector also contacted other members of the licensee's operating and QA/QC staf .0 Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved Item (354/86-10-03), Retest of acoustic monitors. The inspector reviewed Hope Creek Nuclear Department Work Order #86-03-21-097-7, issued to perform a retest of the acoustic monitors. The work order appear-ed to provide adequate retest, however the item will remain open pending satisfactory completion of the work orde .0 Preoperational Test Results Evaluation Review 3.1 Scope The completed test procedures listed below were reviewed during this inspection to verify that adequate testing had been conducted to sa-tisfy regulatory guidance, licensee commitments and FSAR requirements and to very that uniform criteria are being applied for evaluation of completed test results in order to assure technical and adminis-trative adequac !

e

, _ _ ____________ __________

'

.

.

.

-

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 procedures, accep-tance criteria, performance verification, recordina conduct of test, QC inspection records, restoration of system to normal after test, independent verification of critical steps or parameters, identifi-cation of personnel conducting and evaluating test data, ano verifi-cation that the test results have been approve PTP-BB-3 (Part A), Standby Diesel Generator loading, Revision 0, Results Preoperational Review Committee (PORC) Approved March 12, 198 PTP-BB-3 (Part B), ECCS Integrated Initiation / Loss of Offsite Power, Revision 0, Results PORC Approved March 12, 198 PTP-EA-1, Station Service Water, Revision 0, Results PORC Approved February 28, 198 PTP-GK-1, Control and Wing Area HVAC Systems, Revision 0, Results PORC Approved Februtry 28, 198 .2 Discussion

- PTP-GK-1 During review of PTP-GK-1, the inspector had several questions con-cerning performance of this procedure. These questions were discussed with the system test engineer (STE). One question concerned test ex-ception (TE) 47, in which the acceptance criteria for the closing of isolation dampers in response to a simulated signal from radiation detectors RY-4858C1 and RY-4858D1 were deleted. An On-The-Spot (OTS)

change was issued to delete the acceptance criteria and the appropri-ate steps in the procedure. The inspector discussed this change with the STE and a Quality Assurance (QA) representative. It was deter-mined that a design change had been implemented by Design Change Pack-age (DCP) #552, Revision 0 which deleted redundant radiation detector logic channels C1 and D1. Through additional discussion with the STE and further explanation of what testing had been conducted the inspec-tor concluded that the deletion did not constitute an intent change but instead made the testing conducted satisfy the actual design logi PTP-BB-3 (Parts A and B)

A review.of PTP-BB-3 by the inspector indicated that numerous problems were experienced by the licensee during the performance of this tes These problems were identified during the test in accordance with administrative guidance. Due to the difficulty experienced by the

- . . ..

. . .

. .

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_, _ _ _ - _ _

. . .

..

.

.

.

.

licensee's staff in determining the acceptability of PTP-BB-3 results, an engineering evaluation (File No. 701.2 (SE.86.2.10-1)) was perform-ed. The inspector reviewed the engineering evaluation after reviewing the results of BB-3. The inspector determined, as had the engineering evaluation, that major components such as the diesel generators, re-sidual heat removal pumps and core spray pumps had performed satisfac-torily. There were however, enough components that either tripped shortly after starting or did not start during the automatic load se-quencing that full integrated system performance was not demonstrate The licensee has committed to perform certain surveillance tests prior to fuel load. One of the surveillance tests to be performed is Inte--

grated Emergency Diesel Generator 1AG400 (IBG400, ICG400 and 1DG400)

Test-18 Months (OP-ST.KJ-005(Q)).

Whether surveillance test OP-ST.KJ-005(Q) and currently scheduled PTP-BB-3 retests will fully satisfy regulatory requirements and de-monstrate integrated system performance is an unresolved item pending further NRC review and evaluation (354/86-21-01). Addi-tional areas of concern identified during performance of PTP-BB-3 which are undergoing licensee evaluation and/or retest are: high diesel fuel oil consumption, high lube oil (worst case 2.67 gal-lons per hour) consumption, overall chiller (HVAC) performance and miscellaneous equipment malfunctions. These additional areas are being tracked under open Startup Deficiency Reports (SDR) and are listed belo .3 Findings

'In addition to the above unresolved item (354/86-21-01) concerning integrated system testing the following open test exceptions collec-tively constitute unresolved item 354/86-21-0 Unresolved item 354/86-18-01 is close Procedure N Short Title SDR N PTP-AN-2 Demin. Wtr Storage & Transfer AN-0039 PTP-PK-1 125 VDC Class IE PK-0117, 0119 and 0120 PTP-PJ-1 250 VDC Class IE -PJ-0026, 0033 and 012 PTP-BC-1 RHR BC-915, 1042, 1043, 1143, 1144, 1146, 1147, 114 RL-736, 73 .

.

-

_ _ _ _ __

r_,

.

-

..

.

.-

,

PTP-SV-1 Remote Shutdown Panel 88-1011 and 1019; BC-1046, 1080, 1141 and 1142; BD-411, 482 and 496; EG-562, 577, 665 and 666; FC-17; GJ-129, 185 and 195; RL-942, 944 and 950; SV-36, 39, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, *

50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 57; ZZ-996 PTP-SM-2 NSSS and PCIS AB-0470, Equipment Actuation BB-1011 and 1019, BG-0367, GS-0459, HB-829, KL-259 RJ-129, SK-113,

'

SM-0096, 0100, 0101, 0102, 0106, 0107, 0108 and 0109 '

PTP-GU-1 FRVS GV-528, 529, 558, 574, 576, 572, 530, 575, 573, 577, 574, 568, 556 and 581 PTP-EG-1 STACS EG-687, 709, 722, 724, 727, 781, 78 PTP-BB-3 S/B DG Loading GJ-221, 271, 280, (PART A) KJ-1335, 1341, 1353, 1355, 1417, 1418, 1450, 1466, 1506A, 1508, 1516, 1517, 1518, 152 _-__ _ _ _ _-_

y

. ,

'-t -

.-

..

PTP-BB-3 ECCS integrated KJ-1423, 1493, 1494, 1495, 1496, 1497, 1498, 1507, 1508, 1516, 1518, 1521, 152 PTP-EA-1 SSW EA-0471, 0506, 0513, 0528, 0529, 0553, 0573, 0574, 0612, 0636, 0637, 0652, 0656, 0659, 0669, 0683, 0685, 0687, 0692, 0686, 0703, 0704, 0706, 0708, 0716, 0728, 0742, 0743, 0744, 0746, 0747, 0748, 0749, 0750, 0751, 0752, 0753, 0757, 0758, 0760, 0761, 0762, 0763, 0764, ZC-00 PTP-GK-1 Control and Wing RJ-0129, GK-0385, Area HVAC 0420, 0480, 0460, 0477, 0491, 0488, 0492, 0507, 0522, 0476 0513, 048 .0 Preoperational Test Witnessing 4.1 Scope Testing witnessed by the inspector included the observations of over-all crew performance stated in Paragraph 3.0 of Inspection Report 50-354/85-1 .2 Discussion On. March 12, the inspector witnessed several portions of Detailed Test Procedure (DTP) SB-03, Turbine Control Valve (TCV) Fast Closure /Recir-culation Pump Breaker Trip and RPS Trip Response Time. The inspector observed sections 6.37 through 6.42 and sections 6.48 through 6.50 for TCV-3 fast closure and sections 6.51 through 6.57 for TCV-4 fast closure. All testing observed satisfied the criteria above.

.. .. .. .. .. . .

.

. .

_ _ _ _

e

.

.

.

-

Subsequent to this test witnessing, the inspector questioned the method used to calculate the total delay time from start of TCV fast closure to complete suppression of the electric arc between the fully open contacts of the RPT circuit breaker at flow conditions necessary for 100% rated power. After a discussion with the system test engi-neer, it was determined that the value used for the time from trip of the circuit breaker to complete arc suppression was not derived from

" a PORC results approved procedure (DTP-SB-0001) and was apparently not determined at 100% rated power flow conditio The licensee issued several test exceptions to address the above con-cerns and to ensure correct arc suppression values are used for time response calculations. The inspector will review the licensee's ac-tions during a subsequent inspection, after the DTP's have received appropriate approva .3 Findings No unacceptable conditions were observed within the scope of this revie .0 Power Ascension SimJlator Training

,

The inspector witnessed portions of the simulator training provided to test personnel. The licensee utflizes the plant simulator to walk through startup test procedures and to train test personnel in their use. Other plant departments including QA also participate in this program. The inspector witnessed the licensee's classroom and simulator activitie Personnel from the test group, QA and Onsite Safety Review Group partici-pated in the trainin The inspector witnessed the licensee training in the following procedures:

TE-SU.AC-771 Main Turbine Initial Startup, TE-SU.CH-272 Low Power Turbine Stop Valve Trip Test, TE-SU.CH-273 Full Power Generator Load Rejection '

Test, and TE-SU.BB-261 Relief Valve Test. The simulator was used for initial verification of the Main Turbine Initial Startup procedure. The use of the simulator appeared to be very useful for verification of the procedure and in providing training to test personnel concerning procedure use and expected plant performanc Participation by QA and the Onsite Safety Review Group in simulator training will help to assure that personnel are knowledgeable in the performance of their assigned task .1 Findings No unacceptable conditions were note .0 QA/QC a Interf ace with the Preoperational Test Program

.

-

-P 9 I I I l l I I

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

-

.

.

.

.

The inspector reviewed several randomly selected Quality Assurance Sur-veillance Reports (QASR) dealing with the licensee's preoperational test program. The reports were reviewed to verify direct QA/QC monitoring of activities affecting the quality of testing of plant equipment and components. The following QASR's were reviewe QASR-7624, Investigation of possible misalignment on service water pump 1 DP 502. Work was conducted under Work Order 85-12-27-060-0 and tracked by SDR EA-636. The QA inspector observed runout readings being taken. No deficiencies were note l

-

QASR-7610, Preoperational Test EG-1 retest per SDR-EG-0714. The QA l inspector observed retest of HV-2522F. Fast close time was l seconds, acceptance criterion was 3.6 seconds or less. Full close I time was 8.2 seconds with an acceptance criterion of 10 t 2 second No deficiencies were note '

-

QASR-8734, Retest No. 1 of Detailed Test Procedure (DTP) SB-0012 (reactor protection system time response). The QA inspector witnessed several system restoration steps. No deficiencies were note .1 Findings No unacceptable conditions were observed during the above revie .0 Independent Verification During the review of PTP-BB-3 parts A and B the inspector independently reviewed data acquisition system charts and determined, for those re-viewed, that diesel generator voltage and frequency recovered to within 10 percent of nominal and 02 percent of nominal respectively within 60 percent of the next load sequence time period during automatic load sequencing in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.9, Revision .0 Preoperational Test Procedure Verification The inspector verified that the licensee has issued approved preoperational test procedures for all systeins identified in FSAR Chapter 14, Section 14.2.12, that had not previously been reviewed by NRC:R ,

8.1 Findings l

l No unacceptable conditions were identified.

l l

l

- _ - - _

,

- .

. .

w

'

9.0 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 activitie .1 Findings No violations were observe .0 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to determine whether-they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance I'

or a deviation. Unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 of this repor .0 Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection on March 21, 1986, an exit inter-view was conducted with the licensee's senior site representatives (de-noted in Section 1). The findings were identified and previous inspection items were discusse At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector. Based on the NRC Region I review of this report and discussions held with licensee representatives during this ;

inspection, it was determined that this report does not contain 1 information subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restriction i l

!

i l

.

l' i ,- . . . .

. . . . .

, ..