IR 05000412/1987016

Insp Rept 50-412/87-16 on 870316-20.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Action on TMI Action Item & Emergency Operating Procedures

ML20206R277
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	04/14/1987
From:	Blumberg N, Prell J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20206R218	List: IR 05000412/1987016 ML20206R213
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-1.C.1, TASK-TM 50-412-87-16, NUDOCS 8704220136
Download: ML20206R277 (6)

Text

. . _ . _ _ - . . _ . _ - . _ _ . _ . . . _ . __ _

.

.

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

! REGION I

j Report N /87-16 t

i Docket N License N CPPR-105 i Licensee: Duquesne Light Company .

3- P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077

., Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 ,

! Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: March 16-20, 1987 I Inspectors: sagN 2/ @ b87 i James r 11, Readt r Engineer date

Approved by: . /

N6rmBlumberg,fctingChief

} N/Vh

'date

Operational Programs Section /

!

2 Inspection Summary: Routine Unannounced Inspection on March 16-20, 1987 i

(Report No. 50-412/87-16)

l Areas Inspected: Licensee Action on a Three Mile Island Action Item and Emergency Operating Procedures by one Region Based inspector

'

Results: No violations were identified.

i i

<

I 8704220136 870415

$DR ADOCK 05000412 PDR

- - _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - - - _ . _ - - _ - -_ . _ ,_ _ ..-_ ,_..- _ ___ . - _ - _ , _ _ .

.

DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Duquesne Light Company

• J. Belfiore, Senior QA Specialist R. Brooks, Unit 2 Operator Training Supervisor

• D. Claridge, Compliance Engineer

• A. Cooper, Senior Procedure Engineer-Startup Group

• J. Godleski, Senior Test Engineer

• J. Kasuniek, Maintenance Director Startup Group ,

• A. Lerczak, Procedures Supervisor for BV-2

• K. Lowrie, Procurement

• R. Martin, Manager Regulatory Affairs

• M. Pergar, Supervisor 0QC

• L. Rabenau, Lead Compliance Engineer

• 0. Roman, Supervisor QA Maintenance

• C. Sabol, Senior QA Specialist F. Schuster, Operations Supervisor J. Smith, Procedure Engineers BV-2

• R. Swiderski, Startup Manager

• T. Walsh, Nuclear Engineering Records Unit Transition Coordinator

• J. Wolfe, QC Coordinator

• Denotes those present at the exit meeting on March 20, 1987.

The inspector also interviewed other personnel during this inspection perio .0 TMI Action Plan Requirements (NUREG 0737)

During this inspection the inspector verified the licensee's compliance with the following TMI Action Requirement:

Item I. Development of Procedures for Transients and Accidents This item required the development of procedures for responding to transients and accident The licensee's emergency operating procedures (EOPs) are designed to respond to this requirement and are based on the Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) Emergency Response Guide-lines (ERG). WOG-ERG are generic procedures approved by NRC for responding to transients and accider,ts . The inspector verified that the licensee's E0Ps were consistent with the ERGS; verified that the difference between the two were identified and properly addressed; determined that the E0Ps had been properly verified; and ascertained that the E0Ps met all regulatory requirements. Further details are provided in paragraph 3.0 of this report. Based upon this review, this item is closed.

,

--, - ,-e .

,-

- .0 Emergency Operating Procedures 3.1 Regulatory Requirements / References

--Regulatory Guide 1.33, Rev. 2-February 1978, Quality A'ssurance

~

Program Requirements (Operations)'

--ANSI N 18.7-1976, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance .

for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants

--Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) Emergency Response Guidelines-(ERG) - High Pressure- Version, Rev.1, September,1983

--Temporary Instruction 2515/79, June 25, 1986,. Inspection of Emergency Operating Procedures

--Proposed Technical Specifications, Beaver Valley-Unit 2 (March 1987 Proof and Review Copy)

3.2 Program Review The program was reviewed to verify that:

--The licensee has developed a Procedure Generator Package (PGP)

which includes a Specific Writers Guide, a description of the program used for verifying and validating the itcensee's E0Ps,-

and a description of the program for training operators on E0P The licensee has developed procedures for responding to abnormal and alarm condition The licensee has developed emergency. operating procedures-(EOPs)

consistent with the requirements of paragraph 3.1, abov The licensee E0P's have been verified and validated and the results documente The E0P's use a consistent format, which was easy to follow and -

was as defined in their proposed PG The operators have been trained to use the E0P' Differences between Westinghouse's Generic Guidelines and the licensee's specific E0Ps were identified and justifie .3 Program Implementation The following documents were reviewed against the requirements of paragraph 3.1.

l

,

- - -- - . - . . - - - - .. . ..

,

-

.

i

. .

a I

.. .4

'

,

~

--Procedure Generation Package for Beaver Valley Power Station,-

f Unit.1/2, Issue 1, Rev. 1 (Draft Copy)-

--E-0, Rev. 1, Reactor Trip or Safety Injection  !

. --ES-0.0, Rev. 1,_Rediagnosis

--ES-0.1, Rev. 1, Reactor _ Trip Response j

-

--ES-0.4, Rev. 1, Natural Circulation Cooldown With Steam Void Vessel-(Without RVLIS) l

--ES-0.2, Rev. 1, Natural Circulation ~Cooldown

!

--E-1, Rev.1, Loss of Reactor or ' Secondary Coolant

--FR-H.1, Rev.1, Response to Loss of Secondary- Heat Sink '

)

--ES-1.3, Rev. 1, Transfer to Cold Leg Recirculation ,

--E-2, Rev. O, Faulted Steam Generator Isolation i i

? --ECA-2.1, Rev. 1, Uncontrolled Depressurization.of All Steam  !

!

Generators

--ES-3.1, Rev. 1, Post SGTR'Cooldown Using Backfill 1 --ECA-0.0, Rev. 1, Loss of All AC Power t r

--ECA-3.2, Rev.1, SGTR With Loss of Reactor Coolant - Saturated Recovery Desired ,

!

! '

--F-0.1, Rev.1, Subcriticality

--F-0.2, Rev.1, Core Cooling (with RVLIS)

--F-0.2, Rev. 1, Core Cooling (without RVLIS) ~

,

.

--F-0.5, Rev._1, Containment

.

--Table Top Validation for FR-H-1

--Deviation Tracking System for E-0

'--A0P-2.1.1, Rev.

'

O, Failure of RCCA Bank to - Move-Load Increase

,

--AOP-2.1.3, Rev. O, Continuous Insertion of RCCA Control Bank '

.

l --A0P-2.1.5, Rev. 1, Dropped RCCA

,

l

--A0P-2.1.7, Re O, Digital Rod Position Indication Malfunction

,

- - . - _ ,~. -... -. . . . . _ _ __ _._. _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ .-- _ ...

I

.

-

.-

--AOP-2.2.1, Rev. 1, Malfunction of Nuclear Instrumentation

--A0P-2.6.1, 'Re O, Malfunction of Pressurizer Pressure Control

--A0P-2.6.2, Re O, Excessive Primary Plant Containment Leakage

--A0P-2.6.3, Rev. O, Loss of Reactor Coolant Flow

--A0P-2.12.1, Rev. O, Loss of Containment Vacuum

--A0P-2.15.1, Rev.1, Loss of Primary Component and Neutron Shield Tank Cooling Water

--AOP-2.33-1, Rev. 1, Control Room Inaccessibility Based upon this review it was determined that:

--the licensee's E0P's were consistent with the WOG-ERG and their draft PGP,

--all set points were incorporated and consistent with their draf t TS,

--systems different than the WOG generic plant were identified in the PGP,

-- E0P steps different than WOG-ERG and BV-1 E0P's were identified and justified,

<

--the E0Ps had been verified / validated by one of the following methods: table-top, walk-down or simulator validation, and

--the licensee had developed abnormal or alarm procedures to respond to the events identified in RG 1.33, Appendix In addition, the inspector toured the control room and verified that the switches, indicators, and alarms identified in th'e E0P and A0P correctly corresponded to those in the control room; that the type and range of indication required between the E0Ps: and control room

,

'

was consistent; and, that the operators appeared knowledgeable of the various location of the switche The following valve diagrams were compared to the E0P's . to verify proper valve alignment requirement DWG No. 10080-RM-411-1, Low /High Head Safety Injection

--DWG. No. 10080-RM-411-2, SI Accumulators / Nitrogen

--DWG. No. 10080-0M-224-1A, Feedwater Piping System

,

..

..

.,

-l

--DWG No. 10080-0M-224-1B, Feedwater Piping System A review of the program used to train operators on the use- of the E0Ps was made. Based on this review it was determined that:

--All BV-Unit 2 operators, all of whom were previously licensed on BV-Unit 1, will now be dedicated to BV-Unit All operators were required to go to a .15 week prelicense review-training series which reviewed such topics as reactor. systems, thermodynamics, and procedure Each operator had received a five day walk down course, mostly in the control room, covering the differences between BV-Unit 1 and BV-Unit A full: scale simulator mock up of the BV-2 control room was available for use at the training l cente .4 . Findings No violations or deficiencies were identifie .0 Independent Verification The inspector independently verified that the various . levels and values given in the E0Ps (Pressurizer, Steam Generator-and Refueling Water Stor-age Tank levels) were consistent with the indicators found in the control room and that the operators were knowledgeable of where various switches were located. The inspector also verified by review of the P& ids that the correct valves used for isolating the feedwater system were properly iden-tified in the E0P .0 Exit Interview -

An exit meeting was held on March 20, 1987 to discuss the inspection' scope and findings, as detailed in this report (see paragraph 1.0 .for attendees).

)

At no time was written material given to the licensee. The inspector -

determined that no proprietary information was ~ utilized during this !

inspectio ]

i b ]