IR 05000388/1985010
| ML17156A314 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1985 |
| From: | Bettenhausen L, Florek D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17156A313 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-388-85-10, NUDOCS 8506070293 | |
| Download: ML17156A314 (24) | |
Text
U. S
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-388/85-10 Docket No.
50-388 License No.
NPF-22 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an 2 North Ninth Street Allentown Penns 1 vania 18101 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Inspection At:
Salem Townshi Penns lvania Inspection Conducted:
March 18-21 1985 Inspectors:
)
Approved by:
. J. Flor
,
ead eactor Engineer O'K f u~
.
H. Bettenhausen, Chief, Operations Branch, DRS date dat Ins ection Summar
Ins ection on March 28 1985 Ins ection Re ort No. 50-388/85-10 Areas Ins ected:
Routine unannounced inspection of Unit 2 Startup Test program following completion of planned testing including test results evaluation, test exception report review, power level plateau review, previous inspection findings; gA/gC interfaces and tours of the facility.
The inspection involved 28 hours3.240741e-4 days <br />0.00778 hours <br />4.62963e-5 weeks <br />1.0654e-5 months <br /> onsite by one region based inspector.
Results:
No violations were identified.
8506070293 850530 PDR ADOCN 0500038B
POR
DETAILS Persons Contacted Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an J. Everett, Power Production Engineer E. Gorski, gC Supervisor
- J. Graham, Senior Compliance Engineer H. Keiser, Plant Superintendent T. Nork, Startup Coordinator
- R. Prego, Operations gA Supervisor
"R. Sheranko, Startup Test Group Supervisor
- D. Thompson, Assistant Plant Superintendent
- R. Paley, Compliance Engineer J. Zentz, Startup Test Engineer U.S. Nuclear Re viator Commission R. Jacobs, Senior Resident Inspector T. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector, Peach Bottom L. Plisco, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at exit meeting on March 21, 1985.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Items (Closed)
Unresolved item (388/84-30-01):
Shutdown panel requires addition of recirculation pump suction valve "A" control capability.
The inspector reviewed TER-51 which identified this item.
TER-51 was closed out with the licensee analyzing this addition under IRFM-84-433 'odifications, if any, wi 11 be implemented after IRFM-84-433 is completed.
This item will be closed and tracked under a
new unresolved number 388/85-10-01 which also includes all the other open TER's from the Susquehanna Unit 2 Startup Program identified in Section 3'.
(Open) Deviation (388/84-34-03):
Automatic indication (annunciation)
in the control room is not provided when inoperable status of automatic transfer to alternate power sources for ESS Bus on loss of power is deliberately induced during the monthly performance of SM-204-009.
Licensee response in PLA-2389 was reviewed.
The inspector verified that the interim solution to provide continuity checks at the conclusion of the surveillance test was included in the following procedures:
SM-204-009 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; SM-204-010 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; SM-204-011 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; SM-204-012 Rev.
2, dated 3/14/85; SM-104-009 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; SM-104-010 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; SM-104-011 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/84; and SM-104-012 Rev.
1, dated 10/25/8 The inspector noted that PMR-84-3113 and PMR-84-3114 were logged into the PMR system but had. not been issued to the site from the corporate offices in Allentown.
This item will remain open pending inspector evaluation of the design changes and subsequent procedure revisions.
(Open) Unresolved item (388/84-34-07):
This item contained several speci-fic steps:
determine maximum time delay on timing relay, recalibrate overvoltage relay, evaluate procedures relating to the emergency diesel generator remote emergency start, provide RSCN as required, optimize over-voltage protection scheme, and provide procedures for the remote manual start of the emergency diesel generators from the control room.
The inspector reviewed WA-S41886 which determined the maximum time delay on timing relay and recalibrated the overvoltage relay.
The inspector re-viewed PLI-34605 dated 8/27/84 which indicated that an RSCN was not requir-ed and that the modification was still required.
PLI-34728 dated 8/8/84 was also reviewed.
A modification is identified in PMR-84-3105 but has not yet been issued to the site from the corporate offices in Allentown.
Procedure ON-004-002 "Energizing a Dead 4. 16 KV Bus with a Diesel Generator",
was also reviewed.
Pending inspector evaluation of the implementation of the PMR and subsequent procedure modifications this item remains open.
(Open) Unresolved Item (388/84-34-09)
Evaluate and revise, as required> the ATWS procedure and review the differences between Units 1 and 2 relative to the full core display during blackout condition and make recommenda-tions.
The inspector reviewed ATWS procedures EO-100-014 revision 1 dated 9/15/84 and EO-200-014 revision 1 dated 9/17/84 and noted they contained the required revisions.
PLA-2419 dated 3/7/85 indicated further evaluation of control rod indication was planned for the third quarter of 1985 such that any modifications can be scheduled for the third unit 1 refueling outage and second unit 2 refueling outage'his item will remain open pending the licensee evaluation and implementation.
(Closed)
Unresolved item (388/84-34-16):
Review and revise, as required, procedures ON-117-001 and 002, ON-217-001 and 002.
The inspector reviewed PCAF 1-84-1147 to procedure ON-117-001 and PCAF 2-84-1120 to ON-217-001.
Procedures ON-117-002 and ON-217-002 do not exist.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Unresolved item (388/84-34-17):
This item is a duplicate to item 388/84-34-03 which is discussed above and this item is considered closed.
(Closed)
Unresolved item (388/84-34-18):
Provides a description on how to reset SPOTMOS and revise procedures ON-117 and ON-217.
The inspector reviewed PCAF-2-84-1120 which revised ON-217-001 and PCAF 1-84-1147 which revised ON-117-001 for resetting SPOTMOS.
This item is close (Closed)
Unresolved item (84-34-24):
Licensee to evaluate if normal staff-ing is adequate to respond to a station blackout type of event.
The licen-see evaluation concluded that current staffing levels were adequate to handle this type of event.
The inspecto~ also reviewed AD-gA-300 "Conduct of Operations" Revision 5 dated 2/22/85 for the normal shift staffing and the technical specification for the minimum required staffing levels.
Techni-cal specifications require at least 9 licensed and non-licensed personnel whereas the licensee normal shift consists of 17 licensed and non-licensed personnel.
This item is closed.
(Open) Unresolved item (388/84-34-25):
Review SM's, PM's, OP's, SO's and ST's that enter 480V, 4KV, 13.8KV, 250KV, 125VDC and diesel generator cubicles for adequacy.
The inspector reviewed
"SSES Policy on Operation of Electrical Isolation Devices" dated 9/7/84.
The inspector reviewed PCAF-1-84-1152 to AD-TY-460 and PCAF-1-84-1153 to AD-TY-462 which added independent verification for temporary blocking of electrical circuits and pre-test walkdowns to be accomplished prior to conduct of a major startup test.
The activities relating to PM procedures is continuing.
An ERF/
blocking review will be performed on maintenance PM procedures prior to use and will be totally completed by 12/31/85.
This is considered open pending completion of the maintenance PM review.
(Closed)
Unresolved item (388/84-34-28):
Write radio communication proce-dures, include unit separation requirements.
The inspector reviewed OI-AD-035 "Standard Communication Practices and Guidelines",
Revision
dated 8/8/84.
The inspector also noted that unit 1 and unit 2 have separate radio communication channels.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Violation (388/84-34-29):
The licensee activities affecting quality did not include documented instructions appropriate to the ci r-cumstances.
The inspector reviewed the licensee response in PLA-2389 dated 1/17/85.
The inspector reviewed ST-31. 1 "Loss of Turbine-Generator and Off-Site Power" revision 4 dated 8/6/84 for identification of the proper knife switches.
The inspector also reviewed PCAF-1-84-1152 to AD-TY-460 which added independent verification steps to startup procedures for temporary blocking of electrical circuits and pre-test walkdowns to be accomplished prior to conduct of a major startup test.
This inspector noted that the change in AD-TY-460 was implemented in startup test proce-dures based on observations over several inspections of the startup program.
A repeat of the startup test ST-31. 1 was also successfully conducted on 8/7/84.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Violation (388/84-42-01):
Inadequate surveillance procedures relating to End of Cycle Recirculation Pump Trip Instrumentation.
Inspection Report 50-388/85-02 addressed a portion of this item.
The inspector reviewed SI-183-413 Revision 1 dated 2/8/85 which closes out this ite (Open) Violation (388/85-02-01):
Analysis of ST-8.4 and
~ 3 against the acceptance criteria.
The inspector reviewed TER-185 which was prepared to identify the oscillatory behavior indicated during the performance of ST-8.4.
The licensee evaluated the condition as acceptable due to the osci llations occurring outside the normal operating limits.
TER-185 was appropriately dispositioned.
The inspector reviewed TER-186 which was prepared to disposition the, two LPRM's that were bypassed during performance of ST-11.3.
The TER was appropriately dispositioned.
The onsite examination of this violation identified no problems with the licensee corrective actions'he item will remain open pending evaluation of the licensee formal response to the notice of violation.
(Closed)
Unresolved item (388/85-02-02):
Completion of test exception report to document the incorrect rods monitored during the performance of ST-5.7 Scram Timing of Selected Rods.
The inspector reviewed TER-184 which was appropriately dispositioned.
In addition the inspector reviewed the results of ST-5.7 during performance of ST-27.2 with the longest scram time being less than 2.5 seconds.
This item is closed.
3.
Startu Test Pro ram References:
~
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES)
Final Safety Analysis Report
~
SSES Safety Evaluation Report and Supplements 1,2,3,4and5
~
Regulatory Guide 1.68 "Initial Test Programs for Water Cooled Reactor Power Plants"
~
SSES Startup Test Schedule
~
AD-TY-460 Startup Test Administrative Procedure 3. 1 Test Results Evaluation S~co e
The completed startup tests listed in the findings section were reviewed to assess that:
Each was approved in accordance with administrative procedures; Test changes were annotated and completed if appropriate; Basic test objectives were met; Changes and test exceptions were noted;
Test exceptions were resolved and accepted by management; Retests were completed if required; System or process changes necessitated by a test deficiency were properly documented and reviewed; Proper reporting of deficiencies; Data sheets were completed; Data was within tolerances; Test steps and data sheets were properly signed and dated; Engineering evaluation of test data; Test results were compared with established acceptance criteria; Documented review and acceptance of tests results; Offsite review committee and followup if audited; gA or independent review of test results; and Test results approved by appropriate management.
~Findin s
Except as noted below, the attributes identified above were found to be properly implemented in the completed startup test procedures.
A summary of each test follows:
"Scram Timing of Selected Rods During Planned Scrams of Star tup Test Program",
Revision 3, Test implemented January 29, 1985.
All acceptance criteria were satisfied.
Scram times to position 05 were:
t CRD 14-11 30-19 34-23 34-47 50-47 Time (sec)
2.39 2.45 2.39 2.46 2.29 ST-12.2
"High Power APRN Calibration", Revision 2, Test implemented February 4, 198 Test conducted during warranty run.
The Acceptance criteria were satisfied.
APRM Desired
%
Current A
C E
B D
F 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2 100 100 100 100 100 100
"Condensate Storage Tank Injections", Revision 2, Test im-plemented February 1,
1985.
Reactor pressure was 160 psig for performance of this test.
During the quick start HPCI reached rated speed in 15.5 seconds and did not trip.
During the flow steps, no diverg-ent osci llations were noted.
Acceptance criteria were sa-tisfied.
"Reactor Vessel Injection, Rated Pressure",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 18, 1985.
The Test was conducted at 76% reactor power.
The manual start with setpoint controller changes provided no divergent oscillation.
During the hot quick start HPCI tripped due to the aux oil pump being left on during the test.
Due to the automatic restart capability of HPCI, when turbine trip conditions cleared, HPCI restarted and delivered rated flow in approximately 23 seconds.
TER-176 was identified and additional testing performed with the proper test alignment.
"HPCI Rated Pressure Auto guick Starts to Vessel",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 24, 1985.
The Test was conducted at a reactor power of 76%.
HPCI injected greater than 5000 gpm into the vessel in 21.5 seconds.
All acceptance criteria were satisfied.
"Recirculation, Pump Trip Recovery Data", Revision 1, Test implemented January 27, 1985.
The Recirculation pump trip Test was initiated at approximately 98% power.
Temperature difference between the steam dome and the bottom head drain was
F and the temperature difference between loops was
F wi'th drive flow less than 50% when the tripped recirculation pump was restarte "Post Plant Thermal Cycle Data Collection", Revision 3, Test implemented October 29, 1984.
Four test exceptions were identified.
One was closed out and the remaining three remain open and controlled under the NCR system.
See section 3.2.
"RHR Piping Data Collection - Shutdown Cooling",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 29, 1985.
Two test exceptions were identified TER-188 and 189.
Both are being tracked via NCR-85-128.
See section 3.2.
"Process Computer Calculation",
Revision 2, Test implemented February 4,
1985.
This test was conducted during the warranty run.
Reactor conditions include reactor power 99% and total core flow of 89.45%.
This is operation at above the 100%
Xe rod line but within the extended load limit analysis line.
MAPRAT was
.919, MFLCPR was
.908 and MFLPD was
.917.
"Pressure Regulator Test -Bypass Valves Controlling",
Revision 1, Test implemented September 29, 1984.
This test was conducted at 100% reactor power.
All ac-ceptance criteria were satisfied.
No divergent oscillations were noted.
"Feedwater System Level Setpoint Changes",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 27, 1985.
This test was conducted with reactor power at 99%.
A 5 inch level increase and decrease on reactor water level was demanded in both single and three element control.
No divergent osci llations were noted.
Acceptance criteria were satisfied.
"Turbine Stop, Control, Combined Intermediate and Bypass Valve Testing", Revision 4, Test implemented January 19, February 4,
1985.
All acceptance criteria were satisfie MARGINS TO SCRAM Valves Main Stop Combined intercept Control Bypass Test Power (~)
100 100 100 100 Neutron Flux Pressure (%)
(psig)
16.9 55.1 No affect on these 12.6 42.8 15.5 51.6 Heat Flux (%)
15.3 parameters 11.5 13.7 ST-25.3
"MSIV Full Isolation", Revision 3, Test implemented October 27, 1985.
Initial plant conditions included reactor power at 98.8%.
All level 1 criteria were satisfied.
Parameter Acceptance Value Criteria Positive change in dome pressure Positive change in heat flux Reactor scram Yes Yes
<134.3 psig
<3%
MSIV Closure Times A In A Out B In B Out C In C Out D In D Out Max Reactor level 4'5 3.95 4.01 4.49 3.85 4.90 3.39 4.46 76.2 3-5 sec
<118 inches ST-27.2
"High Power Generator Load Rejection",
Revision 5, Test implemented January 29, 1985.
One level 1 test exception was identified due to recirculation pump coastdown being too slow for the first 1.5 seconds of coastdown.
The licensee utilized the MCPR penalty per technical specifications as a short term resolution.
The TER remains open;,
and is tracked as an
NCR.
See section 3.2.
All other acceptance criteria were satisfied.
The other level 1 acceptance criteria were:
Parameter Value Acce tance Criteria Delay between CV or SY closure and TBV open
.006 sec
<.1 sec TBV 80% open after CV or SV starts closing
.114 sec
<.3 sec No flooding of steam lines None None Positive change in dome 88.7 pressure
<115 psig Heat flux increase 0%
<2%
ST-29. 1
"Response to Step Inputs in Individual Local Manual Operation",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 27, 1985
'his was performed on the "A" pump due to work being performed on the "A" pump during the pre-commercial outage.
This test was conducted on the 100% rod line.
No divergent osci llations were noted.
The margins to neutron scram was 17% and 12.2% for heat flux.
"Response to Step Inputs in Combined Master Manual Operation",
Revision 0, Test implemented January 27, 198 This test was performed at the 100
% rod line.
All accept-ance criteria were satisfied.
No divergent oscillations were noted.
The margin to scram for the neutron flux was 12.3% and 7.6% for heat flux.
ST-30. 1
"Recirculation System One Pump Trip", Revision 1, Test implemented January 27, 1985.
Test was initiated from 97.8% reactor power.
Power (%)
97.8 68.9 57.7 MFLCPR
.847
.937
.908 MFLPD
.917
.641
.552 MAPRAT
.922 WT (MLB/HR)
.630
.540 35.5 No divergent oscillation were noted.
The reactor did not scram.
The margins to scram were:
Neutron flux 45%
recovery Water level ll inches trip Heat flux 17.5%
17.2%
recovery trip ST-32.1
"Containment Temperature at End of Heatup" Revision 3, Test implemented January 6,
1985.
All acceptance criteria were satisfied except the minimum local undervessel temperature (84 F vs. greater than 100 F
required)
and the minimum temperature inside the base of the shield wall (85'F vs greater than 100'F required).
Analysis provided by GE indicates that this will be acceptable.
The licensee does have plans to improve this area however.
"Containment Temperature at Steady State",
Revision 4, Test implemented October 25-,
198 Acceptance criteria were satisfied except for minimum temperature inside base of shield wall (86.5'F vs minimum 100'F required)
and the average temperature near the recirculation pump (128 F vs less than 128'F).
Analysis accepted the data as is.
However, modification on the HVAC is planned by the licensee.
"Containment Temperature After Reactor Scram",
Revision 4, Test implemented October 27, 1984.
This test was run in conjunction with ST-25.3.
Acceptance criteria were met except for support skirt flange temperature which was not available during test.
This test was repeated in conjunction with ST-27.2.
"Containment Temperature After Reactor Scram",
Revision 4, Test implemented January 29, 1985.
This test monitored temperatures following conduct of ST-27.2.
Acceptance criteria were satisfied except minimum temperature inside the base of the shield wall (92.6~F vs.
100~F).
GE analysis indicates acceptable as is.
"Main Steam Penetration Concrete Temperature",
Revision 2, Test implemented October 7, 1984.
Acceptance criteria were satisfied.
Concrete Temperature surrounding the primary containment main steam line penetration was 121.6~F vs an acceptance criterion of less than 200~F.
"Steady State Vibration Recirculation Pipings", Revision 2, Test implemented September 30, 1984.
This was performed in conjunction with RHR loop A in shutdown cooling operation.
Acceptance criteria were satisfied.
"Steady State Vibration Recirculation Piping", Revision 2, Test implemented January 6,
1985.
This was performed in conjunction with RHR loop B in shutdown cooling operation.
Vibration levels satisfied acceptance criteri ST-37. 1
"Gaseous Radwaste Data Collection", Test implemented October 7, 1985.
Acceptance criteria were satisfied and accepted by Management.
"Containment Inerting", Revision 2, Test implemented January 31, 1985.
All acceptance criteria were satisfied.
Containment was inerted to less than 4% oxygen concentration in less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
ST-39. 1
"Main Steam Piping Vibration Response During Turbine Stop Valve Testing",
Revision 3, Test implemented January 29, 1985.
This test was run in conjunction with ST-27.2.
Two test exceptions were identified.
One due to a failed spring can hanger and a level 2 vibration failure.
The vibration was analyzed as acceptable and the spring can hanger replaced with the causes of the failure of the hanger still an open test exception (TER-181).
See section 3.2.
"Recirculation Piping Vibration During Recirculation Pump Trips and Restarts",
Revision 2, Test implemented January 27, 1985.
These tests were performed in conjunction with a single recirculation pump trip and restart from 97% power.
Vibration was within the acceptance criteria.
The inspector also reviewed the following startup tests conducted during test condition 6 and verified management review and acceptance of test results:
ST-8.3, 15.3, 23.5, 39. 1, 39.3, 17.8, 35. 1, 37.3, 29.4, 32.2 and 15. 1.
These test results were reviewed in previous inspection reports.
2.2 ~TE The inspector reviewed 46 test exception reports to determine if they were processed in accordance with the administrative procedure and were technically acceptable.
The licensee responded, acceptably to the questions of the inspector.
The test exceptions reviewed were closed out by the licensee except as noted below.
TER-51 was indicated as closed by the licensee but is included in the list below since further evaluation is required by the license TER The following list are those test exceptions where additional analysis is required by the licensee to close out.
They collectively constitute an unresolved item (388/85-10-01).
SUS UEHANNA UNIT 2 NRC OPEN STARTUP TEST EXCEPTIONS ST DESCRIPTION LICENSEE CONTROL 37.3 Offgas flow/dewpoint NCR-85-0106
28. 1 Shutdown panel recirculation suction valve IRFH-84-433
13.1 LPRN deviations NCR-85-0093 179 17. 7 Snubber DCA-210-Hl1 NCR-85-0130 181 39. 1 Spring can DBB-203-H4 failure NCR-85-0129 187 27.2 Recirculation coast down NCR-85-0089 188 17.7 Piping supports NCR-85-0128 189 17.2 Piping supports NCR-85-0128 193 17.5 Piping supports NCR-85-0131 194 17.5 Piping supports NCR-85-0131
II I
3.3 Plateau Review The inspector reviewed the following documents:
PORC Meeting Minutes 85-32 conducted on February 16, 1985 and ST-99.6 Test Plateau
(100%
Rod Line Testing),
Revision 2, Testing commenced September 21, 1984.
The inspector determined that the plateau review was conducted as described in the administrative procedure.
The inspector deter-mined that the FSAR required tests were conducted during test condi-tions 4, 5 and 6 and that the test exceptions identified were properly resolved.
Those test exceptions not closed out (however resolutions were defined and approved)
agree with the inspector records and are listed in Section 3.2.
QA review of the completed test results was noted.
No unacceptable conditions were noted.
The plant was declared commercial on February 16, 1985.
4.
~/C I The inspector noted that QA reviewed the completed test results as required by the administrative procedures.
The inspector held discussions with the QC Supervisor regarding the open test exception reports in Section 3.2 and verified that they had been included in the NCR system.
No unacceptable conditions were noted.
5.
Tour of the Facilit Dur>ng the course of the inspection the inspector performed a tour of the facility including turbine building and control room to observe work in progress.
While in the control room the inspector observed the licensee initiate a manual scram of the Unit 2 reactor from approximately 10K power due to a voltage disturbance.
Unit 1 was in refueling.
Several alarms annunciated due to the disturbance and the operators manually scrammed the reactor.
No unacceptable conditions were noted.
Followup of this event will be performed by the Resident Inspector, who arrived in the control room within a few minutes following the manual reactor scram.
6.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is needed to determine whether they are violations, deviations, or acceptable.
The unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraphs 2 and 3.2.
7.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection on March 21, 1985 an exit meeting was conducted with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted in paragraph 1).
The findings were identified and discussed.
At no time during the inspection did the inspector provide written inspection findings to the licensee.
The licensee indicated that no proprietary information was contained in the scope of this inspection.