IR 05000412/1987019

Insp Rept 50-412/87-19 on 870309-13.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Program Including Witnessing of Tests,Review of Repts,Status Review of Test Deficiencies,Qa & Previously Identified Unresolved Items

ML20215G531
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	04/03/1987
From:	Eselgroth P, Marilyn Evans, Vankessel H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20215G524	List: IR 05000412/1987019 ML20215G522
References
50-412-87-19, NUDOCS 8704170151
Download: ML20215G531 (11)

Text

. .

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report No. 87-19 Docket No. 50-412 License No. CPPR-105 Priority -

Category B Licensee: Duquesne Light Company P. O. Box 4 Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2 Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: March;9-13, 1987

1L Inspectors: [hk pb H. vanKessel, eactor Engineer y - 2-67 date n_ fA4l! V~3"$?

M.G. Evans,pactorEngineer date Approved by: M -5" U P. W. Eselgyjifth, Chief date Test Prog 4m Section, 08, DRS Inspection Summary: Inspection on March 9-13, 1987 (Inspection N /87-19)

Areas Inspected: Routine Unannounced Inspection of the Preoperational Test

'

Program, including the witnessing of preoperational tests, the review of pre-operational test reports, the status review of test deficiencies, the review of activities in the QA interface, and the review of unresolved items

identified by the inspector in previous inspection All the Main Steam

! _ Isolation Valves r. ave been reinstalled af ter refurbishing of valve actuators with the modified actuator components. P',ast-I tests are scheduled for the l

near futur Results: No violations were identifie NOTE: For acronyms not defined refer to NUREG 0544, " Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms".

!

l

! 8704170151 8704A0 PDR ADOCK 05000412 O PDR L

-_

_

a-

. .

.

l DETAILS Persons Contacted Duquesne Light Company (DLC)

T. Brown, Test Engineer

• R. C. Callaway, Test Supervisor, Phase-2

• N. J. Daugherty, Director Systems Testing D. L. Dygert, Test Engineer M. F. Edgar, Test Engineer

• J. P. Godleski, Senior Test Engineer K. E. Halliday, Assistant Superintendent Engineering

• D. C. Hunkele, Director QA Operations

• J. D. Johns, Supervisor QA Surveillances F. R. Michael, Test Coordinator

• T. P. Noonan, Superintendent Operations and Maintenance J. S. Patterson, Test Coordinator

• L. M. Rabenan, Lead Compliance Engineer P. Slifkin, Test Supervisor, Phase-1

• R. J. Swiderski, Startup Manager R. Walulick, Maintenance Supervisor

• G. R. Wargo, Assistant Director SQC

• L.lP. Williams, Test Director, Phase-1 R. G. Williams, Software Development Supervisor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• A. Asars, Resident Inspector, Beaver Valley 2

• J. Beall, Senior Resident Inspector, Beaver Valley 2

• Denotes those present at exit meeting of March 13, 1987.

i Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Deviation 412/86-32-02, " Determination of Available Net Positive Suction Head (NPSH) for Recirculation Spray Pumps."

Scope Preoperational test procedure P0. 2.13.01, " Recirculation Spray System

'

Pumps and Controls" does not determine available NPSH as required in FSAR l

paragraph 14.2.12.15.1, under " Test Methods", Item Reference Letter 2NRC-6-131, from Duquesne Light, Mr. J. J. Carey, to the

,

USNRC - Region I in response to Notice of Deviation 86-32-02, dated December 30, 1986.

,

_

_-.

.

. .

Discussion The explanation given in reference-1 is understood and acceptable. It is recognized that the measurement of available NPSH during the pertinent test would be meaningless. Even if the test were conducted with the water level at the centerline of the inlet nozzle the available NPSH would still exceed the required NPSH. The adequacy of the design and the reliability of the RSS pumps has been demonstrated adequately via an extensive vendor test program and hydraulic model testing. The elimina-tion of this test requirement from the FSAR test abstract 14.2.12.15.1, Test Method Item 3, is acceptabl Conclusion The inspector has no further questions on this Deviation ite (Closed) Unresolved Item 412/86-43-03, " Human Engineering Deficiencies (HEDs) of Emergency and Alternate Shutdown Panel (ESP and ASP)."

Scope It had been noted during the witnessing of preoperational test P0.2.04.02, " ESP and ASP", that certain HEDs, which were corrected on the main control board (MCB) still existed on the ESP and AS These deficiencies included:

, Absence of (red) pointers on some instruments used during the test . Missing label on HVAC switch addition on the AS . No instrument " islanding" on ESP and ASP as was done on the MC . No permanent instrument identification tag Discussion The licensee has taken the following actions in regard to the 4 items mentioned in the scope above:

Re item 1: The appropriate points have now been installed on the two types of instruments of both the ESP and AS Re item 2: Temporary labels have been provided for the new HVAC switches on the ASP. Permanent name plates have been ordered. These plates will be installed when receive Re item 3: Permanent instrument " islanding" has been installed on both ESP and AS _ _ _ . _ - .

. .

Re item 4: Permanent labels have now been installed for all instruments and switches on ESP and ASP except for the new HVAC switches mentioned under item 2 abov The inspector verified that these actions were taken and has no further questions on this ite Conclusion This unresolved item is hereby close .0 Preoperational Test Program 3.1 Preoperational Test Witnessing Scope Selected steps of the Phase-2 test procedures listed in Attachment A were witnesse Test witnessing included observations of the attributes listed in Section 3.2 of inspection report 412/86-2 Discussion The start of the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG)-A, performed as part of preoperational test P0.2.36.B.01 as run No. 4, was successfu All operating parameters of the EDG stabilized at acceptable values except for one of the engine cylinder exhaust temperatures which was totally out of line with the other reading A test deficiency report was produced to initiate correction of this deficienc Prior to the EDG-A start, the relief valve RU-208 on the air compressor for the A unit was lifted as part of the procedure S0V.2.34.05,Section IV F.1 The test was successfu The relief valve lifted at 444 psig and reset at 220 psi A time response test for OT delta T was performed under preopera-tional test P0.2.01A.02, "RPS-ESFAS Time Response Tests." The inspector witnessed Steps VII G.15 and 16. It was noticed that the trip bistables for loop 2 Over Temperature and Over Power Delta T Circuits were tripping erratically from causes unknow It was suspected that the use of walkie-talkies in the control building at the time of the test could have been the cause of this erratic behavio A startup work request (SWR - 013072) was issued to investigate the caus It was noted, however, that this phenomenon was not recorded as a test deficiency. Not having a test deficiency on the record would mean that a retest would not be required. Even though the test was eventually performed with valid results, a retest after the identification of the cause of the erratic circuit behavior would seem appropriate. The test supervisor has agreed to

. .

make a test to recreate the erratic circuit response through the use of walkie-talkie The licensee's action on this item will be followed under Unresolved Item 87-19-0 The inspector witnessed a portion of the performance of a retest of Section VII. A of P0.2.07.01 (Charging Pumps and Controls), charging Pump Suction Valve Logic Tes For all testing witnessed, the in-spector noted performance in accordance with procedural requirement During performance of Step VII. A.26, charging pump suction valve 2CHS*LCV1158 did not remain closed as stated in the test procedure. Following review of applicable logic diagrams, the test engineer determined that valve 2CHS*LCV1158 should open and then auto close instead of remaining closed as stated in the pro-cedur Change Notice #41 was issued to correct the procedure and testing was resume Licensee's evaluation of test results and resolution of identified deficiencies will be reviewed during a subsequent routine inspectio Findings No violations were observe .2 Test Result Evaluation Scope The test procedures listed in Attachment B were reviewed to verify that adequate testing was accomplished in order to satisfy regulatory guidance and licensee commitments and to ascertain whether uniform criteria were being applied for evaluating completed preoperational tests in order to assure their technical and admin-istrative adequac Discussion The test results were reviewed for:

Test changes Test exceptions

Test deficiencies

Acceptance criteria

Performance verification Recording of conduct of test QA inspection records System restoration to normal

• Independent verification of critical steps or parameters Identification of test personnel Verification that the test results have been approved

<

. .

It was noted that there were several instances where a test deficiency was written against the lack of power supply to instruments needed during the test. The inspector felt that such power supplies should be checked prior to the test as part of the prerequisites or initial conditions. The test supervisor thought that these power supply problems were caused by the incompleteness of systems 4 and The inspector felt that the use of a test deficiency to identify incomplete construction work would be acceptable but that there still should be a prerequisite to identify the need for the power supply (temporary or permanent).

The examples given to the test supervisor were:

P0.2.06.04, test deficiency #8

P0.2.07.01, lack of power to panel "2RPS-Aux.A" and lack of power to annunciator isolation cabine The inspector will follow this item under Unresolved Item 87-19-0 The Test Results Reports reviewed indicate that retests will be performed as indicated in Attachment Findings No violations were observe . Independent Inspection Efforts 4.1 Status of Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIVs)

Scope The status of the MSIVs in terms of modification completion, re-installation, and testing was determine Discussion

All (3) valves have been modified to the latest design requirements as determined from the actuator testing program conducted by SWE The modified valves have been reinstalled and are ready for the Phase-1 tests. The seat ring packing leakage problem still exist Packing resilience is not sufficient to make the packing come back fully to its original configuration after pressure has been applie Leak tests indicated approximately 7 cu. ft./hr of leakage. Spring tension on the seat ring was rearrange This action has eased the problem somewhat. A report was issued on the testing and modification of the valve It was learned during the inspection period that NMP-2 had made the decision to replace their MSIV ball valves (of the same make and model). Duquesne Light's (DLC) management will reconsider their position in the light of the NMP-2 experienc . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. .

Conclusion Shortly after this inspection, DLC has made the decision to replace the MSIV ball valves. This is expected to delay the fuel load date to May 21, 198 .2 Power Operated Relief Valve (PORV) Testing Experience Scope In view of the quality problems experienced at other, recently commissioned, nuclear power plants, the inspector reviewed the receiving, installation, and testing experience of the PORVs at Beaver Valley- Discussion

<

The PORVs of this plant have not experienced significant problems to date, according to the people involved in receiving, installation and testing of these valve Changes to the orifices to improve valve stroke time are being made. No unacceptable departure from the required dimensions of the valve components have been observe Conclusion No violations were observe . QA/QC Interface Scope The participation of the Duquesne Light QA Surveillance Group in the preoperational test program was evaluated by the inspector. Responses by startup management to Surveillance Deficiency Reports (SDRs) were reviewe Discussion Responses by startup management to the following SDRs were reviewed:

SRD N Def. N Description POT-53D-86 1 No entry in Test that prerequisite plant conditions were reviewed prior to tes No OSOS initials entere P0T-18J-86 1 Errors in entering changes POT-71-87 1 No OSOS initials each operation shift Each of the responses by startup management to the listed SDRs appear to be acceptabl _____-

_ . - ._ - .. - -- . . - - - .

- - , . _ - _ -

. .

Findings The inspector has no questions on the responses to the listed SDRs.

Plant Tours Discussion The inspector made several tours of the plant including the control

, building, auxiliary building, service building, turbine building,

condensate polishing building, safeguards building and reactor containment to observe the status of construction, work in progress,

,

housekeeping, testing activities and cleanlines Findings ,

i

No unacceptable conditions were note . Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about whi::h more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance, or a deviatio New unresolved items in this report are identified in paragraphs 3.1 and , Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection, on March 13, 1987, an exit interview was conducted with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted 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 inspecto 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 informa-tion subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restrictions.

i

!

!

!

!

,

_ _ , . - . _ _ , _ _ , _ , , . _ , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ , _,,-___,m _,__.,__...-..y__--._,-y....._... , _ , , - . _ , . . - - _ . . , . -

- .

ATTACHMENT A to 412/87-19, Beaver Valley-2 Test Witnessing Proc. N Title Rev. No. Approval JTG P0.2.01A.02 ESFAS-Time Response 0 11-24-86 P0.2.36B.01 Emergency Diesel Generator Test 0 11-25-86 P0.2.07.01 CVCS Pumps & Controls 0 07-09-85 P0.2.13.02 Quench Spray Pump / Controls 0 08-23-84 SOV.2.34.05 Loss of Instrument Air 0 12-10-86

>

..

'

.

ATTACHMENT B to 412/87-19, Beaver Va11ey-2 Test Result Evaluation Approval Date Proc. N Title Rev. N TRR By JTG*

P0.2.06.01 RCS Cold Hydrostatic Test 0 10-10-86 P0.2.06.04 RCS Loop Isolation Valve Initial 0 03-03-87 P0.2.07.01 CVCS Pumps and Controls 0 03-03-87 P0.2.07.03 CVCS 0 02-06-87 P0.2.13.03 Quench and Recirc. Spray Nozzle 0 02-06-87 Air Flow Test P0.2.13.04 Refueling Water Storage Tank 0 03-02-87 P0.2.21A.01 Atmospheric Steam Dump Valves 0 02-06-87 and Residual Heat Release Valves P0.2.21A.02 Main Steam Safety Valve Test 0 12-12-86 P0.2.24C.01 Steam Generator Level Instr. Test 0 01-26-87 P0.2.39.03 Batteries Inverters and Chargers 0 02-17-87 Test P0.2.47.06 Containment Structural Integrity 0 03-04-87 (Admin. review only)

S0V.2.04.01 Condenser Steam Dump System 0 01-16-87

• TRR - Test Result Report; JTG - Joint Test Group

,

. . . .

ATTACHMENT C to 412/87-19, Beaver Valley-2 Open Test Deficiencies (TD) Requiring Retest Proc. N TD N Remarks P0.2.06.04 1,4,5,6 SWR 9591 for repair. Retest for all 4 TDs P0.2.13.04 8, 10 New motors with more rigid base. Retest #13-00 P0.2.21A.01 8 Valves 2SVS*PCV-101 A and C and 2SVS*HCV-104 to be repaired and reteste P0.2.24C.01 4,7 Incorrect oil pressure and alarm setpoints 5,6,8 Non actuation of low Nitropen pressure alarm 9 E&DCR (D-5140). Closing times for valves 2FWS*FCV479, 489, 49 P0.2.39.03 5,7 Retest log #38B-006. Fault recorder check for vital buses 2-3 and 2-4.