IR 05000412/1987043
| ML20235H243 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1987 |
| From: | Florek D, Wen P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235H115 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-412-87-43, NUDOCS 8707150067 | |
| Download: ML20235H243 (6) | |
Text
_ - _ _ _ _
i
.
..
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-412/87-43 Docket No.
50-412
'
License No.
NPF-64 Licensee:
Duquesne Light Company P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Facility Name:
Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 Inspection At:
Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: May 26 - June 3, 1987 Inspectors:
7e + C-5/30/f7 P. Wen,
. actor Engineer, DRS date Approved by:
D. Florek, Acting Chief, Test Programs date
'
Section, OB, DRS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on May 26 - June 3, 1987 (Inspection Report No. 50-412/87-43)
Areas Inspected:
Initial Fuel Loading Witnessing Results: No violations were identified.
NOTE: For acronyms not defined refer to NUREG 0544, " Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms."
8707150067 B70706 PDR ADOCK 05000412 G
_ _ _ _ _ - _ -
.
..
I DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Duquesne Light Company
- A. Brunner, Refueling Supervisor
- N. Daugherty, Startup Consultant J. Dusenberry, QA Surveillance
- J. Godleski, Senior Test Engineer l
- D. Hunkele, Director QA Operations
'
- J. Johns, Supervisor QA Surveillance J. Kane, Refueling Engineer
- T. Noonan, Assistant Plant Manager
- L. Rabenau, Lead Compliance Engineer
- T.
Zyra, Director Site Test and Plant Performance Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation
- R. Wittschen, Licensing Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- J. Beall, Senior Resident Inspector
- L. Prividy, Resident Inspector The inspector also contacted other administrative and technical licensee personnel during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting held on June 3, 1987.
2.0 Fuel Loading On May 28, 1937, the NRC issued a license authorizing fuel loading and low power (less than 5 percent power) testing at the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2.
On May 29, 1987 at 0400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br />, the licensee commenced fuel loading activities per fuel loading procedure FP-DMW-IF, " Beaver Valley Unit 2 Fueling Procedure Initial Core Load," Revision 0.
Core loading was completed on 0338 hours0.00391 days <br />0.0939 hours <br />5.588624e-4 weeks <br />1.28609e-4 months <br /> June 1,1987.
The licensee performed core loading on two ten-hour shifts.
The NRC inspectors provided fuel loading coverage during most of the core loading period.
2.1 Fuel Loading Activities Witnessing Scope Throughout the entire fuel loading period, the inspectors verified that the following requirements were met:
!
,
_
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
l
.
..
)
Continuous communication was being maintained between the j
--
control room and fuel loading stations; Continuous monitoring of the source range channels and use of
--
inverse count rate ratio calculations; f
Boron concentration met TS required values and was sampled per.
..
--
procedure IST 2.14A 01;
]
i Minimum crew requirements were met;
)
--
--
Fuel status tag boards were updatec following each fuel move;
--
Plant conditions were being maintained as required by TS; j
--
Shift change and test briefing were properly conducted;
--
Access control to Containment and Fuel Building had been established and was in place.
Discussion Baron Concentration)
After verifying that no stratification existed within reactor vessel i
and that the boron concentration in the reactor vessel was greater than the required 2000 ppm, the Residual Heat Removal System loop water was sampled and analyzed for boron concentration at regular intervals during the core loading period.
The inspector verified through control room log review and direct observation of the chemistry technician performing boron sampling analysis that boron concentration was maintained between 2033 - 2053 ppm.
Fuel Assembly Handling Deviation Report (FAHDR)
Any irregularity noted during fuel movement was logged in the FAHDR.
There was only one case identified during the fuel loading period.
On May 30, 1987, at Step 27 of FP-DMW-IF, Fuel Assembly (FA) A47 was supposed to be lifted to the upender in the Spent Fuel Pool (SFP).
The step and A47 position (M30) were correct, however, the refueling procedure was incorrectly listed the position as N30.
The problem was immediately identified by refueling personnel stationed in the spent fuel pit responsible for verifying each FA's identification number.
The followup investigation conducted by the licensee also identified that the correct listed position for FA All at Step 102 should be N30 instead of M30. These errors were made during the process of transferring records from new fuel receipt map to the
,
refueling procedure map.
_ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _.___-_____ _
__
__
_ _.
__ _ _ - ____
l.
'
l.
.,
The problem was corrected promptly and fuel loading' continued.
Signal Interference on Nuclear Instrumentation Counting The licensee used 5 source range (NI-31, NI-32, and 3 temporary detectors) neutron flux detectors to monitor. neutron multiplication during the fuel loading period.
Generally these source range detectors provided a reliable reading, however, due to signal in;erference, NI-31 and NI-32 were often experiencing counting
.
spikes when the SFP upender motor changed speed..In the l
containment, two of three' temporary detectors (Channels A and C) were also experiencing noisy readings when the manipulator crane approached the temporary detector counting station and the crane bridge motor was turned on.
i During the first day of operation, the 1/M plot from the NI-31.did not provide a clear subcritical determination due to -the above mentioned signal interference and the relatively low count. After
,
examining the source range count data and 1/M plot, the inspector was concerned on the reliability of the' source range detector data.
This concern was discussed with plant management.
Subsequently, the fuel loading practice was modified; in that, a reliable count was obtained prior to operating refueling equipment which would generate the interference signal. This practice was instituted throughout the rest of the fuel loading period.
Core Verification After completion of fuel loading, the licensee performed core verification.
Using a TV camera and video recorder, the as-loaded core was compared with the intended core loading' plan as described in the fuel loading procedure.
The verification was performed by the Westinghouse fuel loading crew and the licensee QC personnel in the containment. Another independent verification was performed by the licensee refueling supervisor and the Westinghouse' fuel' loading-crew leadar.
In this verification, the as-loaded core from the video tape was verified against the Westinghouse design drawing.1557E91, " Beaver.
Valley Unit 2 Core Loading Plan Cycle 1," Revision 2.
Both core verifications were determined to be satisfactory.
No discrepancies were identified.
Findings The licensee's fuel loading was accomplished in accordance with approved procedure (FP-DMW-IF).
Prior.to fuel load the core. loading prerequisites (P0-2.01A.08) were completed.
Licensee performance-throughout the entire fuel loading period was deliberate, and carefully controlled.
RCS boron concentration and RCS temperature were consistently maintained within the required limits.
_
_ _ _ _ _ -
!
.
l
+.
l
!
Subcriticality monitoring (1/M plot) through all 5 source range detectors was continuously evaluated. At no time were loading operations interrupted as a result of unexpected changes in these evaluations.
!
After completing fuel loading, the as-loaded core was verified to be l
in agreement with the intended core loading pattern.
No outstanding discrepancies or problems exist.
!
3.0 Independent Calculations / Verifications i
The inspectors performed independent calculations / verification during
!
fuel loading period as followed:
l
!
Independently verified that the subcriticality monitoring (1/M plot)
l
--
was calculated correctly on a sampling basis.
Independently verified that the loading steps were consistently in
!
--
agreement with the fuel loading procedure.
l
!
Performed independent core verification by comparing the as-loaded
--
core from the video tape against the intended core map from the fuel
'
loading procedure.
4.0 QA/QC Interface i
The inspector verified that fuel loading procedure FP-DMW-IF had provisions for QC witnessing of certain test steps. Witness points were provided in the master copy of the procedure and initialed by QC personnel.
The inspector also noted that QC inspectors provided surveillance for tool and personnel controls on the containment operating deck and spent fuel pool.
The QA surveillance group on the other hand, j
verified that the fuel loading procedure was being met by the various groups.
Throughout the entire fuel loading period, the inspector noted that QA/QC provided shift test coverage.
The inspector also reviewed surveillance reports performed on a sampling basis.
The inspector considered the QA/QC coverage during the fuel loading activities was comprehensive,
)
i adequate, and acceptable.
l
5.0 Management Meeting
'
Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at an entrance meeting conducted on May ?6, 1987.
The
}
findings of the inspection were discussed with licensee representatives during the course of the inspection. An exit meeting was conducted on June 3, 1987, at the conclusion of the inspection (see paragraph 1 for attendees).
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_.
.
..
_ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _
_
i
.
.
.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the
~
licensee.
Based on the NRC Region I review of this report and discussions held with the licensee representatives at the exit meeting, it was determined that this report does not contain information subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restrictions.
!
!
,
l
)
.