IR 05000412/1987038

Insp Rept 50-412/87-38 on 870514-20.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Program,Including Witnessing of Electrical Independence Test,Status Review of Test Deficiencies & Review of Activities in QA Interface

ML20235L785
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	06/30/1987
From:	Florek D, Vankessel H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20235L777	List: IR 05000412/1987038 ML20235L774
References
50-412-87-38, NUDOCS 8707160825
Download: ML20235L785 (9)

Text

.

-

i

!

l U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I l

!

Report N /87-38 i Docket N ;

License N CPPR-105 Category B

]

Licensee: Duquesne Light Company i P.O. Box 4 1 Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2 Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Condu t d: May ]4-20, 19f;7 Inspector:

Henri"F vanKessel., Reactor Engineer b-M-C date Approved by: Ik D. Florek', Chief Test Program Section, OB,

!3d 7 j dite'

DRS Inspection Summary: Inspection on May 14-20, 1987 (Inspection No. 50-412/87-38)

Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of the preoperational test (POT) program, including the witnessing of the Electrical Independence Test (Loss of Offsite Power Test), the status review of the POT program in connection with preparedness for initial core-loading, 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 Results: No violations were identifie Note: For acronyms not defined, refer to NUREG 0544, " Handbook of Acronyms and-Initialism".

B707160625 67070B PDR ADOCK 05000412 O PDR

-____-__-___________ ._. - . - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . ._ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _-

_ _ _ - _ _ _ - -

.

DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Duquesne Light Company (DLC)

T. Brown, Test Engineer

• P. A. Cadena, Principal Engineer R. C. Callaway, Test Supervisor, Phase-2

• N. J. Daugherty, Director Systems Testing

• J. P. Godleski, Senior Test Engineer K. Havelka, QA Engineer

• D. C. Hunkele, Director, QA Operations

• J. D. Johns, Supervisor, QA Surveillance J. R. Kasunick, Director Maintenance

• L. R. Knapp, Senior Electrical Engineer R. V. Oliveri, Test Engineer D. E. Pattison, Test Engineer A. R. Pietrangelo, Senior Test Engineer (B0P)

• L. M. Rabenau, Lead Compliance Engineer J. Walsh, Test Engineer

• R. Wargo, Assistant Director QC

• T. G. Zyra, Director Testing and Plant Performance US Nuclear Regulatory Commission J. Beall, Senior Resident Inspector L. J. Prividy, Resident Inspector

• Denotes those present during exit meeting held on May 20, 1987 2.0 Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved Item 86-38-01, " Emergency Diesel Generator Discrepancies".

Scope The review of the test results for the phase-1 tests of the Emergency Diesel Generators, EDG 2-1 and 2-2, identified 6 open items as listed in Inspection Report 50-412/86-11, Section 3. All of these open items have now been addressed by the license References Letter from Penn Run Corporation to Duquesne Light Company (DLC),

" Laboratory Analysis of Lube Oil Samples submitted by Duquesne Light Company to Determine the Cause of the Clogging of Lube Oil Filters",

dated May 15, 198 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -

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

.

3 Inspection Report 50-412/87-36, Section 2 Discussion EDG lube oil samples from the EDG 2-2 (South unit).were submitted to Penn~

Run laboratories (see ref 1) to determine the cause of the clogging of the lube, oil strainers (see sub item 5 of ref. 2). The final report produced by Penn Run Laboratories (PRL) is inconclusive. .In discussion with th responsible DLC test engineer, PRL will be approached again with specific questions to resolve the inconsistencies. The' samples analyzed by PRL include samples of the residue found on the East and West Lube Oil Strainers (baskets). These samples should determine if the experienced excessive pressure differential across the twin lube oil strainers was caused by the lube oil system preservative plate-out (Tectyl) or by l carbon (soot) build-up, an indication of fuel combustion problems.

Conclusion This Unresolved Item will remain open until sub item 5 (lube oil strainer delta P) and 2 have been complete (Closed) Unresolved Item 412/87-10-01 Determine if complete logic testing had been performed on Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Load Sequence .S.C9Le During review of P0-2.36A.2 (NRC inspection 50-412/87-10, Paragraph 5.1)

the inspector noted that EDG load sequencer testing being conducted did not appear to address all expected logic combination ,

Discussion The inspector reviewed the completed phase 1 startup proof test N ,

2T-NNS-36B-2.27, Testing of the Sequencer for Emergency Diesel Generator 2 EGS*EG2-1, Revision 0. The test was completed on 24 June 1986. The inspector found the test to be comprehensive'and tested all j expected logic combinations that were not addressed in P0 2.36A.0 l Findings This item is close .0 Preoperational Test Program  :

3.1 Test Witnessing loss of Offsite Power Test (LOP)

Scope The LOP test, P0-2.36A.02, " Electrical AC Indepence Test" was witnessed in full detail by the inspector on May 16 and 17, 1987.

L _ - _ - ___ --_-_-- - _ - _ - _ __- _ -

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

i

.

.

References P0-2.36A.02, " Electrical AC Independence Test", Rev. O,

. approved by JTG on December 31, 198 . Test Deficiency No.'s 1-17 for PO-2.36A.02, dated May 16 and'

17, 198 Discussion The LOP test was performed for the B train on May 16, 1987 and'for j the A train on May'17, 1987. For-both trains, the test was initiated )

by opening the breakers supplying the offsite power to the plant I simultaneous with a Safety Injection Signal (SIS). After  !

restoration of the-systems the test was repeated but, this time with '

a Containment Isolation Phase B (CIB) signa During the LOP test EDG 2-2 blew a ' gasket on the turbo-charger causing smoke in the EDG building. Performance of the unit, however,-

was satisfactory. The smoke was cleared by the building ventilation system. Sequencing of loads onto the emergency busses proceeded satisfactoril For both trains the total load carried by the EDG after the SIS signal was approximately-2100 kw,' very close to the j expected load. For the CIB signal the EDG load dropped to approxi-mately 1600 kw in both cases, again close to the expected load. The '

inspector observed position changes for all items on data sheets 12 and 13 (for B train) and on data sheets 5 and 6 (for A train). The ,

total number of Test Deficiencies (TDs) wds 1 Component Cooling Water Pump P21A tripped out on over current after sequencing onto the-emergency bus correctly. -All of the. Test deficiencies were either-foreseen, because of prior problems or unavailability, or were of a relatively minor nature. Copies of all TDs were collected by the inspector (Ref. 2) for future followup on corrective action take Findings i No unacceptable conditions were noted by the inspecto The 17-TDs recorded will be added to the overall listing of TDs as discussed in section 3.2 belo .2. Test Deferral Review Scope A review was made of the deferral of preoperational tests'which

.

should be completed (per FSAR) before initial core loading but are not completed.

- _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

l

'

.

.

I Discussion A listing was made of all exceptions to the preoperational tests (P0s) which are required to be completed (by FSAR) before core loading. The status of all P0s was determined in terms of completion i of test sections, Test Results Report (TRR), Test Completion Report !

(TCR), retests required, and the new startup milestone schedule to be i l met for completion. The licensee prepared written justifications for all test deferrals. These justifications were reviewed by the inspector and were found to be acceptable in all cases. The listing of all test deferrals and their new startup milestone schedule for completion is shown in Attachment Findings No unacceptable conditions were noted in the review of the pre-operational test deferral j

$

3.3 Test Deficiency Review S_cgILe I With the POT program more than 80% complete, the inspector prepared a listing of all open TDs of P0s with safety significance. A review was made of selected completed items to determine the acceptability of the corrective actions taken. Such a review was made also for selected in-work item Discussion I

The schedule for the completion of open TDs will be linked to the !

new schedule for system PO test completion deferrals as discussed j above under paragraph This listing of all TDs (for P0s), I therefore, was integrated with the test deferral list of Attachment A. The resulting list of safety. significant items will be used by the inspector in future inspections to ascertain timely and l effective completion of these TDs. It is hereby identified as i Unresolved Item 412/87-38-0 Future POT items will be added to the l listin The Unresolved Item will remain open until all TDs have ~!

been completed satisfactorily. The inspector reviewed the open TDs l l for P0-2.10.01, "RHRS", which have to be completed prior to Core i Loading. All the safety significant TDs have been completed I satisfactorily including the retests, where required, such as TD No's 7,8,12,14, and 1 l

' i Also reviewed were the open TDs for P0-2.36A.01, " Emergency AC Power Distribution", and PO-2.368.02, "EDG Full Load Test", both of which have to be completed prior to Core Loading. Again, all safety significant items had been completed satisfactoril .

l

'

6 5

.

l Findings No violations or deviations were observed by the inspecto .0 Independent Inspection Effort Scope The lube oil system design for the diesel engine of the Emergency Diesel l Generator (EDG) sets (2) was reviewed by the inspector for means of i detecting and alarming an unacceptable pressure differential across the i twin lube oil strainer Reference Operations and Maintenance Manual for Colt Pielstick Model PC2V 1 Standby Units, Colt D/G set, Document No. 11-206147, Volume I and I l Discussion The flow diagram for the lube oil system, in reference 1, was studied to

'

determine how an excessive pressure differential can be detected across the twin lube oil strainers and if this condition is alarmed locally or '

on the Main Control Board (MCB). It was determined that the means exist to detect such a-pressure differential but that no pressure instrument-ation exists to identify and alarm such a conditio An excessive pressure differential across the lube oil strainers will cause oil starvation of the engine and its critical part There is no lube oil bypass on the twin oil strainer This inspector was concerned if such excessive pressure differentials could develop under normal and abnormal engine operatio Excessive pressure differential across the lube oil strainers has been experienced at BVPS-2 during preoperational testings. This experience, however, may be related to a one time clogging of the strainer caused by the lube oil system's protective coating (Tectyl) going into solution during the initial diesel startup, when lube oil temperature increases, and the subsequent plating out of the material on the strainer's filter medium after the oil has been cooled in the Lube Oil Heat Exchange Samples of the strainer deposits have been analysed by a laboratory (see section 2 above).. No conclusive information has been derived from this laboratory analysis. The inspector will followup on this possible design problem in a future inspectio Conclusion Since a direct lube oil delta P alarm is not available locally or on the

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

. .

_ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,. .. . .. . .. .. .

.. .. .. .. .-

. I i

\

.

MCB, the control room operator has no means of identifying degrading )

condition. Further, it is not clear what mechanism exists to cause an 3 unacceptable delta P. The inspector will follow up on this item in a  ;

future inspectio .0 QA/QC Interface l Scope The continued participation of the Duquesne Light QA Surveillance Group I in the preoperational test program was evaluated by the inspecto Discussion

!

For continuation of the assessment of QA/QC involvement in the ]

pre]perational test program, the inspector reviewed the surveillance j report for the LOP test of train B (SIS and CIB signal). The j surveillance report showed no unsatisfactory conditions prevailing during I the LOP test Findings a

No unacceptable conditions were identifie j l

6.0 Unresolved Items

'

Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance, or a deviation. New unresolved items in this report are identified in paragraph .0 Exit Interview l At the conclusion of the site inspection, on May 20, 1987, an exit l interview was conducted with the licensee's senior site representatives l (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 inspector. 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 information subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restriction ,

I l i E__________-.____________________________________.--_.- __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _]

I

.

!

..

l l

Attachment A J Preoperational Test (PO) Completion Deferral (after Core Load)  :

Proc N Title New Schedule Prior to: l P0-2.01A.03 Verification of Rx Plant Set Points Mode 4 P0-2.01A.04 Safeguard Test Cab. Actuation IC i P0-2.01A.11- ESF Time Response Summary Mode 4 (< 350F) l PO-2.03.01 In Core T/C & RTO Calibration IC (Post Core HFT)

PO-2.06.04 RCS Loop Isolation - Initial Mode 3 (PCHFT) ,

P0-2.06.05 RCS Loop Isolation - Final During Mode 3 (PCHFT)

l P0-2.06.06 PRT & PORV During Mode 3 & 5 res P0-2.06.07 Pressurizer Pressure / Level Control During Mode 3 (PCHFT)

PO-2.06.13 RV Head Vent System Mode 4 l PO-2.07.02 BAT System Test IC PO-2.07.03 Chem. & Volume Control System Commercial Operation P0-2.11A.02 Safety Injection Check Valve Test IC PO-2.11A.04 Auto. Switch to Recirculation Mode 4 and 3 (for I and 2 ECCS resp.)

P0-2.11A.05 Misc. SI MOV Control & Alarm Test Mode 3 P0-2.13.01 RSS Pumps & Controls Mode 3 or 4 (PCHFT)

PO-2.13.04 Refueling Water Storage Tank Mode 4 P0-2.14A.02 Post Accident Sampling System IC l

P0-2,16.01 Suppl. Leak Collection & Release Mode 4 (PCHFT)

System P0-2,20.01 Fuel Pool Cooling System 1st Refueling P0-2,20.02 SFP and Refueling Cavity Leak Test 1st Refueling P0-2.21A.01 Atmosph. Steam Dump Valves & RHR IC

,

Valves

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

__ -_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-

\

Attachment A 2

,

Proc N Title New Schedule Prior to:

PO-2.21A.03 MSIV and Bypass Isol. Valve Test Mode 3 (PCHFT) )

i PO-2.24B.01 Motor Driven Aux. Feedwater Pump & Mode 3 (PCHFT)

Controls i P0-2.24C.01 Steam Generator Level Instrument Test Mode 4 (PCHFT)

l PO-2.30.01 Service Water System IC i P0-2.36A.02 Electrical AC Independence Test Mode 4 P0-2.43.01 Radiation Monitoring System IC l

P0-2.44A.01 Control Bldg HVAC Mode 4 P0-2.448.01 ESF Equipment Ventilation Test IC PO-2.44F.01 Misc. SR HVAC System Tests Mode 3 l P0-2.450.01 Heat Tracing System Test, Cat. 1 IC l P0-2.46.01 Post DBA Hydrogen Control System Mode 3 i P0-2.47.11 Cont. Pen. Valve Integrity Test IC P0-2.66.02 Cranes Portions Deferred to IST Refuel.

,

l l

l l

l

- _ _ - - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ ~