IR 05000395/1979025
| ML19275A722 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 08/28/1979 |
| From: | Burnett P, Donat T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19275A721 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-79-25, NUDOCS 7910190022 | |
| Download: ML19275A722 (6) | |
Text
.
[
'o UNITED STATES
!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
g
.. m
REGION II
o 101 MARIETTA ST N.W., sulTE 3100 g
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
Report No. 50-395/79-25 Lit:ensee: South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Columbia, South Carolina 29218 Tacility Name:
V. C. Sun 2er Docket No. 50-395
'r License No. CPPR-94
,'
Inspected at V. C. Summer site near Parr, South Carolina Inspected by:_ h D b d 9/2 F/79_
T. J. Donat V Date Signed Approved by:
g giaM/
f/ f [f f
,
P. T. BurnM'Acfing Section Chief, RONS Branch Date Sigahd SUMMARY Inspected on August 6-8, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 24 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of preoperational test procedure review, preoperational test witnessing, and review of plant construction status.
Results Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
\\ \\79 DM 7910190
.
.
DETAILS
'.
.
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- 0. S. Bradham, Plant Manager
- H. T. Babb, General Manager of Nuclear Operation and System Plaaning
- J. G. Connelly, Startup Supervisor D. Hembree, Assistant Startup Supervisor K. W. Chapman, Startup Test Engineer
.
Other licensee employees included construction craftsmen, and office'per-sonnel.
Other Organizations C. W. Bowman, Westinghouse Startup G. coup Supervisor H. W. Gutzman, Westinghouse Test Engineer G. S. Keltner, Westinghouse Test Engineer
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 8, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. The inspector summarized the areas inspected and discussed the inspector-identified items addressed in paragraphs 5.a and 5.b.
The licensee acknowledge the comments and stated that they would be resolved.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Preoperational Test Procedure Review The inspector reviewed the following preoperational test procedures for conformance to Regulatory Guides 1.68, 1.79, ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, FSAR Sections 3.91, 5.3, 5.5.7, 6.2.2, 6.3, 8.2.1, 8.3.2, 14.1 and Table 14.1:
ED-1, "D. C. Distribution System", Revision 1, 7/6/79
.
ES-00-E-05, "7200 Volt Switchgear Busses 1A, IB, IC Preoperational
.
Test", Revision 0,6/18/79 1179 020
-
.
-2-
,
SI-3, " Accumulator Blowdown Test", Revision 0, 7/9/79
.
RC-01-H-1, " Reactor Coolant System Cold Hydrostatic Test", Revision 1
.
5/15/79 SP-2, " Reactor Building Spray Pump Flow Test", Revision 1, 5/15/79
.
C5-5, "-Solid System Pressure Control Test", Revision 0, Draft 7/24/79
.
RH-1, "RHR Pump Flow Test", Revision 0 Draft, 7/24/79
.
SI-6, " Safety Injection Flow Balancing Test", Revision 0 Draf t,
.
7/24/79 i
a.
General Comments 1.
The Engineered Safety System tests SP-2, SI-3, SI-6, and RH-1 do not include steps requiring vibration measurements on piping and valves or steps for observing piping, restraints, snubbers, hangers and supports during different modes of system testing as described in FSAR section 3.9.1.1 and Regulatory Guide 1.79 section C.2.C.
The licensee acknowledged the lack of a vibration inspection program and agreed to have the procedures revised.
This will be followed as Inspection Followup Item 79-z5-01.
2.
The Westinghouse generated preoperational test procedures, SP-2, SI-3, SI-6, RH-1, CS 5, RC-01-H-1, do not contain signoff pro-visions to indicate comple ion of the test acceptance criteria requirements. The licensee's Startup Test Manual in the section on phase II test procedures addresses need for verification that test acceptance criteria are met. The licensee agreed to have the procedures revised t, provide specific signoffs that each acceptance criterion has been satisfied. The inspector will review these procedures during a subsequent inspection, and this is considered Inspector Followup Item 79-25-02, 3.
Preoperational Tests SI-6 and RH-1 provide precautions concerning not operating the centrifugal charging pumps and the residual heat removal pumps below their respective minimum NPSH suction pressures. However, neither test procedure provides the minimum NPSH suction pressure for either the centrifugal charging ptunps or for the residual heat removal pumps. The minimum NPSH suction pressure should be specified in the precaution as well as on the data sheets where suction pressure is recorded. The licensee acknowledged the comment and agreed to have the procedures modi-fied. This will be followed as Inspection Followup Item 79-25-03.
b.
Specific Comments - Procedure RC-01-H-1 1.
The RCS hydrostatic test procedure, RC-01-H-1, establishes in steps 6.73 and 6.74 the hydostatic test pressure of 3107 PSIG at 1179 021
.
-3-
.
an elevation corresponding to the steam generator tube sheets.
This results in a significant portion of the reactor doolant system including the reactor vessel head, steam generatrr tubes, and pressurizer not being pressurized to the minimum hydrostatic test pressure in accordance with Section III ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Division 1, Subsectioc NB paragraph NB-6221.
The licensee's NSSS vendor stated that this was due to limita-tions specified in the " Steam Generator Technical Manual",
IMS-94B-034-0. A review of Section 3.10.1 of this manual showed that the hydrostatic test pressure for the steam generator was 3107 PSIG but that the maximum pressure was 3137 PSI.
In order to fully comply with the hydrostatic test requirements in Division 1ofSectionIIIAS""BoilerandPressureVesselNode,a test pressure of 3107 PSIG would be applied to the highest point in the reactor coolant system, the pressurizer relief piping.
This corresponds to a test differential pressure of 3132 PSI at the steam generator tube sheet which is below the technical manual maximum differential pressure. This was identified to the licensee who agreed that the procedure was in error and would be changed. He also agreed that relief valve settings discussed it steps 3.4.7, 4.6, and 4.16 of the test procedure will hav'
a be revised. These items were to be checked on a subsequent i_. spec-tion and will be tracked as Inspector Followup Iter 79-25-M.
2.
In step 6.35 the reactor coolant pumps are started when the plant pressure is between 325 and 375 PSIG. The FSAR in section 5.5.1.3.8 specifies that the minimum plant pressure for reactor coolant pump operation is 400 PSIG. The licensee acknowledge the conflict and agreed to have either the FSAS or the test procedure changed. This will be reviewed on a later ir.spection as Inspector Followup Item 79-25-05.
3.
The hydrostatic test procedure, in attachment V, provides for the recording of NieT temperature data on the reactor ves ul, steam generator, pressurizer and other system locations. However, the NDT temperatures for these components are not listed in the procedure. The licensee agreed that the NDT temperature for the components listed on attachment V should be added to procedure, most probably to the data sheet itself. This item is identified as Inspector Followup Item 79-25-06.
4.
The inspector had numerous other comments concerning the need for conciseness and specificity in prerequisites so that test direc-tor will know what is being signed for and so that independent reviews can be performed on the procedure. The licensee acknow-ledged the inspector's comment.
Specific Comments - RH-1, RHR Pump Flow Test c.
1.
Steps 6.1.9 and 6.1.15 require recording pump and motor vibration data in accordance with attachment III. The attachment showed all 1179 022
.
-4-
.
.
vibration being measured in the same plane whereas the FSAR requires orthogonal sets of readings. Also thettable provides for recording pump and motor temperatures while the procedure measures motor bearing temperature.
2.
Steps 6.3.3 an' 6.4.3 fail to install the special Heise gauges at the pump suctions needed per attachments IV and VI.
The resolu-tion of these coments will be followed as Inspector Followup Item 79-25-07.
d.
Specific Coments - SI-6, SI Flow Balancing Test 1.
Step 6.6.48 establishes balanced full hot leg injection h)w through FE-943 as a confirmation of the flow settings established in step 6.6.47.
However, in step 6.6.46 the pumps minimum recir-culation valve is positioned fer 60 gpm initially and is never closed once the injection flow is initiated. This affects the pump suction and discharge pressure data recorded in step 6.6.50.
A similar problem exists for the other pump in steps 6.6.61 and 6.6.63.
2.
Steps 6.6.84 and 6.6.88 operate centrigugal charging pumps B and C without performing a valve lineup to unisolate the particular pump and isolate all other pumps, as required by the data table.
3.
Steps 6.6.55 should remove differential pressure test indicators from flow elements FE-985, 986, and 987 and install them on taps for flow elements FE-975, 976, and 977.
The resolution of these comentu will be checked on a subsequent inspection and is considered Inspector Followup Item 79-25-08.
6.
Followup on Finding of Previous Inspections Closed - Inspector Followup Item 79-0/-01, concerning coments on preoperational test procedures ES-00-E-5, "7200 Volt Switchgear Busses IA, IB, IC Preoperational Test"; and ED-1, "DC Distribution System".
The inspector reviewed revision 1 to ED-1, "DC Distribution System",
and noted that the comments on the rate used in the discharge test were now consistent with the FSAR and that the comment on the length of the discharge test had also been satisfied.
The inspector reviewed revision 0 ES-00-E-05, "7200 Volt Switchgear Busses IA, IB,1C Pre-operational Test", and noted the procedure had been completely reorganized with a set of general notes at the be-ginning of the test method section concerning how relays, breakers and lockouts would be actuated and where indications and alarm functions would be verified. Also, each subsection within the test had a set of notes listing the items to be tested and giving their full title, schematic designator, function, and location. The procedure still did
,
1179 023
.
-5-
.
not reclose the emergency incoming breaker between steps 6.198 and between 6.1.99, 6.2.98 and between 6.2.99 and 6.3.99.
The test.,
director had a test change notice generated to correct the procedure in this area. Based on the revised procedures this item, 79-07-01, is closed.
7.
Plant Tour The inspectdr toured areas in the auxiliary building, reactor building, intermediate building, control building, and turbine building. The areas were observed for cleanliness and general housekeeping. No items of non-compliance or deficiency were identified.
,,
.
.
1179 024
,