IR 05000358/1978026
| ML19269B913 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1978 |
| From: | Dettenmeier R, Maura F, Streeter J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19269B908 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-358-78-26, NUDOCS 7901190018 | |
| Download: ML19269B913 (6) | |
Text
.
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUI.ATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-358/78-26 Docket No. 50-358 License No. CPPR-80 Licensee:
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company 139 East 4th Street Cincinnati, OH 45201 Facility Name: William H. Zic=er Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspectic At: Zirrer Site, Moscow, OH Inspection Conducted:
October 17-20, 1978 j) /
Inspectors:
F A ra j
D enne r 5 bn-
.1/., /g Approved By: J. F. Streeter, Chief Nuclear Support Section 1 Insy_ec_ tion Suy m m 9L8_JJ_eyert Nc. 50-358]_78-2R Insy_ec_ tion on October 17-20
Areas Insy,e_ ctg :
Routine, unannounced inspection of the preeperatiencl test progra organization and administration; turnover package for preoperational testing; preeperational test precedures; status of previous unresolved items, and the status of construction as it relates to the preeperational test program. The inspection involved 57 inspector-hours ensite by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7 9 0119 0 0 lh
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Per s_c;ns Centacted
- J. Schott, Station Superintendent
- S. Martin, Test Coordinator W. Schwiers, Principal OA and Standards Engineer
- R. Wood, QA&S Engineer
- M. May, G.E. Site Operations Manager The inspector also interviewed other licensee empicyees including cembers of the administrative, technical, cperating, and QA&S staffs; and employees of the General Electric Cocpany and Reactor Contr:ls, Inc.
- Denotes these present at the exit interview.
2.
Overall Freeperational Test Pregrat The inspector completed his review of the preoperational test program, as described in the FSAR, Preeperational and Startup Testing Manual, Startup Administrative Control Procedures, Station Administrative Instructions, and Startup Project Procedures to ensure that:
Areas of testing have been identified and assignments of a.
responsibilities made, b.
Format and centent of test procedures have been established and meet ANSI N 18.7 and Reg. Guide 1.68.
Administration of the test pregree has been established c.
for jurisdictional centrol of systems and cetponents before, during, and after testing, d.
Administrative controls to ensure control and use of test procedures, test performance and preper review of test results have been established.
Procedures to control design changes, temporary modifications, e.
jumpers, bypasses and relay blocks have been established.
f.
Procedures for the control of equipment and zene cleanliness, including periodic inspections, to asaure the adequacy of housekeeping have been established.
-2-
'.
.
'
g.
Adeinistrative procedures for the control of test and ceasurement equipment (identification, calibration, storage, etc.) have been established.
h.
All personnel involved in the test progra= have betn trained in the procedures which control the preop prograr and in the applicable sections of the FSAR, Reg. Guides, and ANSI Standards. The training, and each individual's qualifications, have been preperly docurent-d. Persennel in the prograc meet all qualification requ1recents.
1.
Preoperational program administrative procedures have been established which control who may perform maintenance activities during the preop testing phase. However, station administrative procedures which establish the contrels on how the taintenance prograc will function are still being developed.
j.
Key personnel are familiar with the program and their responsibilities, k.
All tests identified in the FSAR are scheduled to be ccepleted as part of the program.
The inspecter reminded the licensee that complete installation of seisric restraints, pipe hangers, etc. is required by the FSAR prier te preeperational testing of the equipcent. The licensee stated their plans are still te atend the FSAR so that the requirement is postponed to prier te fuel 1cading.
No items of ncnceepliance or deviations were identified.
3.
P_recyer_a_t_f onal Tc_s_t Proce_d,ure Review The following procedures were reviewed and found to ceet the requirements of Reg. Guide 1.66, FSAR commitments, Freoperational Startup Testing Manual, and Startup Administrative Control Precedures, unless noted below.
PO-HP-1, "High Pressure Core Spray." The licensee will a.
change the procedure to include (1) verificatien of calibration of special test equipment, (2) reccvel of special test equipment at the completion of the test, (3) verification of water quality prior to injection inte the reactor pressure vessel; and (4) verification of test results after issuance of the Technical Specificatiens to determine any retesting requirements.
-3-
.
.
.
b.
PO-DC-01, "125 Volt DC System" and PO-DC-03, "24/48 Volt DC System." The licensee will change the procedures including (1) requiring the batteries to have been on an equalizing charge at least 3 days prior to testing, (2) revising the performance test data sheets to require ccre frequent readings near the end of the test as the cells voltage may approach polarity reversal, (3)
replacing the service test with a one hour discharge at 80% of the battery rating (125 volt battery only), the service test will be performed during the Vital Buses preop test simulation of loss of offsite power, and (4)
adding step to require jumpering any cell if its voltage approaches reversal of polarity. Regarding cells jumpered during the test, the licensee was asked if they would be replaced. The licensee stated the cells would be recharged or replaced at the end of each subtest prior to the next subtest so that each succeeding test would serve to demonstrate that the corrective action taken was adequate.
PO-PC-1A, " Containment Local Leak Rate Test Type B" c.
No items of noncompliance er deviations were identified.
4.
Review of Turnover Fackage The inspecters reviewed the turnover of the D.C. Distributien system for preoperational testing. The inspecters noted that the package had been accepted with " Code 2" deficiencies, which appeared to be in noncompliance with Startup Project Precedure SU.PRP.01.
Since the procedure was not clear as to whether Code 2 deficiencies could be accepted or not, SU.PRP.01 has been revised to state they can be accepted as
" exceptions," but must be corrected prior tc acceptance of the test results.
No items of nenecepliance or deviations were identified.
Plant Familiarizstion The inspectors continued their familiarization with plant systems and layout en October 19, 1976. No significant concerns were identified.
-4-
,
.
.
.
Identified Unresolved Items (Report 50-358/78-05)
6.
Previously Core Support Plate Fins a.
The inspector reviewed the results of the hardness ceasure-cents made on five test pins bent to different deflections ranging from 1/16" to 1/2".
According to the General Electric representative, the acceptable limit on bending is 3/16" which showed an increase in Rockwell B hardness from 79 (for a straight pin) to 85.5.
Measure =ents cade on straight welded.'ns vs. straight unwelded pins showed no difference in hardness.
The inspector also reviewed the results of the measurecents taken on the core support plate pins to determine the present The largest deflection noted was.026" degree of bending.
on pin #44 which is within the allowable bending as stated previously ( ( 3/16").
The inspector inquired as to what plans existed for the three for which it pins previously " repaired" with the lead hat =er is icpossible to determine the degree of bending experienced.
According to the licensee, those pins are to retain as is.
The inspector restated his previous position that the three pins should be replaced since there is no way of determining This itee retains the degree of bending they experienced.
unresolved pending completion of the licensee's evaluation and subsequent review of this matter by the inspector.
The licensee has not yet determined if the fuel support The inspector pieces will fit in the core support plate holes.
noted that some of the pins which were now deterrined toThis be straight had earlier failed the go-no ge gauge test.
means that the initial failure to meet specs is not necessarily due to pin bending, but that the distance from the center of the 10" hole to the center of the pin may be out of specs.
The inspector stated the real test is to determine if the fuel support piece fits and that is why he has been requesting during previous inspections that such a check be made before This ite:
any attempt to straighten bent pins is made.
remains open.
-5-
a
.
.
.
b.
Control Rod Drive Housing Alignment to Core Plate The licensee does not have any new information concerning the status of the layout studies described in Section 4.2.3.1.3 of the FSAR. The inspector requested the licensee obtain from the vendor layout studies for the following itecs:
(1) The core location of the worst case, and (2) The clearance, stresses, etc. at the worst location.
This item remains unresolved.
7.
Ex1 Inte rview The inspectors cet with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on October 20, 1978. The inspectors su=marized the scope and findings of tne inspectier.
.
-6-