IR 05000412/1987054

Insp Rept 50-412/87-54 on 870720-24.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Witnessing Preoperational Test Program,Review of Preoperational Test Repts,Status Review of Deficiencies & Review of Activities in QA Interface

ML20238A936
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	08/13/1987
From:	Eselgroth P, Vankessel H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20238A932	List: IR 05000412/1987053 IR 05000412/1987054
References
50-412-87-53, NUDOCS 8709010006
Download: ML20238A936 (11)

Text

1 l

l

!

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !

REGION I j Report N l Docket N License No. NPF-64

)

Licensee: Duquense Light Company i

Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit #2 l l

Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: July 20-24, 1987 Inspectors- .

8' / 3 ' ff 7 Henry v essel, Reactor Engineer date Approved by: .

f-/J W Peter W. Esel 'oth, Chief date Test Progra ection, 08, DRS Inspection Summary: Inspection on July 20-24, 1987 (Inspection Number 50-412/87-53)

Areas Inspected:_

Routine Unannounced Inspection of the Preoperational Test Program, including the witnessing of preoperational tests, the review of preoperational 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 on previous inspections. The inspector also I reviewed the status of the licensee's program to install an additional lube oil strainer in the lube oil systems of the two Emergency Diesel Generator I Results: No violations were identifie '

Note: For acronyms not defined, refer to NUREG 0594 " Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms" j i

i gMER Ndd" l l

l

< 2

i

l

.

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted

Duquesne Light Company (DLC) i

• Badgett, QA Specialist R. A. Brown, Test Engineer, phase-2 i

• S. B. Bennett, System Engineer M. K. Covey, Test Engineer N, J. Daugherty, Reop. Test Consulant J. P. Godleski, TCT Engineer J. R. Rasunick, Director Maintenance W. A. Kraycar, Test Engineer l J. D. Johns, Supervisor QA Surveillance j

• W. S. Lacey, Plant Manager  !

• E. L. Martin, Compliance Engineer l M. R. Miller, Test Engineer J J. 5. Patterson, Test Engineer A. R. Pretrangelo, Test Supervisor D. W. Stark, Supervisor Flush-Hydro

• D. G. Szucs, Compliance Engineer J. M. Walsh, Test Engineer

• R. Wargo, Assistant Director QC

• L. P. Williams, Director Startup l *R. G. Williams, Preop. Test Supervisor l

• T. G. Zyra, Director Taud PP U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• J. Beall, iacior Resident, Unit #2 L. J. Pr' S , Resi e.nt Inspector, Unit #2

-

• Denotes those present in the exit meeting held on Friday, July 24, 198 . Licensee's Action on Previous Inspection Findings  !

(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-412/87-19-02):

l'Use of test deficiency to identify unsatisfied test prerequisite or initial condition."

Scope

Two examples were given in the inspection report 412/87-19 of the subject matter:

[

I

-

• For P0-2.06.04, test deficiency No. 8

For P0-2.07.01, lack of power to panel

"2RPS-Aux. A and lack of power to annunciator isolation cabinet. It was felt by the inspector that there should have been a prerequisite in the procedure to identify the need for the power supply, temporary or permanent."

References i Chapter 8.2.1 of BVPS-2 Startup Manual, j

" Administrative Guidelines for Performing Tests,"  !

revision 2, paragraphs VaA.4g, h, and ) TPP 12.2, paragraph 5.4.1, " Retest Activities,"

rev. 2, pages 8 and 9 , JTG Policy Statements, JTG Meeting 023,

" Support Systems (IE Instrument Air,120 VDC (120VAC)," dated June 8, 1984 JTG Policy Statements, JTG Meeting 089,

" Power supply and Control Switch List,"

dated September 27, 1985 Discussion The check for required system operation, including power supplies, prior ,

to preoperational testing is the responsibility of the test engineer and !

is coordinated with operation This pretest check is covered by administrative guidelines (see ref.1 and 2) for performing tests and is

,

l consistent with JTG Policy Statements #035 and #089 (ref. 3 and 4). The '

licensee feels that these references (1 through 4) provide sufficient control over the pretest check for needed power supply operations, without including detailed power supply and control switch lists in the test procedure. After review of reference 1 through 4, the inspector accepted the licensee's position and had no further question Findings This unresolved item is close {0 pen)UnresolvedItem(50-412/87-45-01):

" Fuel Oil System Cleaning History"

.

Scope A number of discrepancies were farmed during the review of the phase-1 documentation for the cleanino and flushing of the fuel oil system of the Emergency Diesel Generators, EDG 2-1 and 2-2. Six specific questions were defined in earlier inspection reports (Ref. 1) which needed an answer (items a through f). All of these questions have been answered except for item (a) which deals with the cleaning of the 12 individual fuel oil supply lines to EDG 2-1 and 2- References Inspection Report Report 50-412/87-51, for inspection completed on July 24,1987 i Log sheet (page 8) of " Cleanness Procedure Detailed Log", procedure l 2T-EGF-368-1 of 6, rev. O, log entry dated March 75, 1986, for system restoration of EDG 2-2 (B)

Discussion The documentation for the cleanliness verification of the fuel oil supply lines of EDG 2-2 (B) was made availabl (see Ref. 2 above). However, the documentation for EDG 2-1(A). was not available. A letter will be solicited from the vendor (Colt Industries) by the licensee to document l cleanliness of the fuel oil supply lines for EDG 2-1 (A).

Findings This item will remain open until documentation is made available to show that the EDG 2-1 (A) fuel oil supply lines (12) were cleaned in accordance with the vendor's requirements and acceptance criteria. As stated in Ref. I above, the inspector verified the cleanliness of the balance of the fuel oil systems for both diesel generator i 3. Preoperational Test Program 3.1 Preoperational Test Witnessing Scope Selected steps of test procedure PO 2.06.10, " minimum Continuous Pressurizer Spray Flow Test" to be completed prior to mode 2, were witnessed by the inspector. Test witnessing included observations I of the attributes listed in Section 3.2 of Inspection Report l 50-412/86-2 This procedure verifies that a low temperature alarm clears when the minimum continuous flow rate has been reached.

l l

- - ______ - _ _ _ _ _ _

.

- 5 Discussion In this test the manual valves in the (spray valves) bypass spray line are adjusted to obtain the minimum flow rate consistent with a stable spray flow temperature. It was found, however, that the low temperature alarm could not be cleared even with-the valves wide open. Excessive heat loss from the spray line was suspected to be the root cause of this proble Extra testing was performed to produce a plot of Spray line temperature versus time to obtain a trend for the temperature with flow rate for loops 21 and 2 An Engineering Memorandum (EM No. 62452) was written to request engineering (NERU)'s assistance to resolve this problem. Possible options for problem resolution were developed during this inspection period including, i

Increasing spray line insulation and filling existing gaps i !'

present insulatio *

Put on some pressurizer backup heaters continuously to make up 1

'

for the heat loss. Unresolved Item (50-412/87-53-01) has been assigned to follow this problem to its conclusio Findings No violations or deviations were identifie .2 Preoperational Test Result Evaluation Scope The Test Results Reports (TRRs) for the test procedures listed in Attachment A, including retests and test completions, were reviewed to verify that adequate testing was performed in order to satisfy regulatory guidance and licensee commitments and to ascertain that uniform criteria were being applied for evaluating completed pre-operational tests to assure their technical and administrative adequac Discussion The TRRs were reviewed for the attributes listed in Inspection Report 1 50-412/87-19. Each TRR was reviewed together with the file containing the completed original of the procedure and the corres-pondence associated with completed work and retesting for identified test deficiencies. All of the files reviewed were complete and in good orde It was noted in procedure PO-2.13.01, "RSS Pumps and Controls" that some plant parameter inputs for the plant computer

.

i

-

i i

were shifted to the ERF computer. Normally, the plant parameters signals for the ERF computer also go to the plant computer for the !

operator to ascertain plant status during emergency conditions. The licensee agreed to review the impact of the plant parameter deletions on the operators ability to ascertain plant stata Test Deficiency Report (TDR) #1 8 of procedure P0-2.16.01,

" Supplemental Leak Collection and Release System (SLCRS)," concerning the inability to produce a negative pressure ( .125 inches of water)

in the Fuel Building, still is active. At present holes in the walls are being fille This TDR does not have to be resolved until !

commercial operatio '

TDRs 1 and 2 of procedure P0-2.44A.01, " Control Building (CB) HVAC System Test," were initiated for the vibration readings for A/C Unit 2 HVC*ACV 201A, B exceeding the acceptance criteria (from phase-1 testing). After the rework for the structural support of the A/C unit, vibration readings were taken and submitted to engineering for review and evaluation. In accordance with EM-62196, the vibration data was not acceptable. EM-62317 was then issued for further direc-tion from engineering. Engineering stated that the units were ac-l ceptable for commercial operation and that a long term recommendation i will be submitted to DLC for resolution at a later date. The inspector expressed concern about the initial inspection of the units and their subsequent acceptance for " commercial operation." A clarification of the engineering decision will be pursued under unresolved Item 50-412/87-53-02 together with the other items of concern identified abov Findings 1

No violations or deviations were observe I 3.3 Test Deficiency Review 1 New test deficiencies, ccmpleted as well as uncompleted were reviewed for the adequacy of corrective action taken or planne With exception of the cases mentioned above under paragraph 3.2, the corrective action was found to be acceptabl Findings No unacceptable conditions were observed within the scope of this review.

l l

l l

l l

.

.

7 Independent Inspection Effort 4.1 Status Of The Pressurizer PORVs and Safety Valves (SVs)

Scope

<

In view of the quality problems encountered at other nuclear plants with the subject valves, the inspector reviewed their mechanical' and operational history of PORVs and SV Discussion A chronological history of the subject valves was provided by th2 licensee (see ref.1) with regard to the Pressurizer Code Safety Valve 2 RCS*RV5518. It was reported to leak on. November 30, 198 The valve was removed and sent to Crosby on December 31, 1986, where the valve was disassembled and inspected. No discrepancies were found. The nozzle was lapped to the body. The valve. internals were cleaned and the valve was reassembled. The relief valve set point was set with air, the seat leakage test was performed with steam. The test results were satisfactory. The valve was re-installed on April 30, 198 Recently, with the plant in mode 3, operations noted a hot tail pipe temperature on the "B" and "C" Code Safety Valve This does not I necessarily mean that these valves are leaking. With a contact listening device on the valve housings of these valves no appreciable noise could be hear There also appears to be no appreciable increase in the level of the Pressurizer Relief Tank. An in place set point verification will be performed on the "B" valve with an approved procedur With regard to the Pressurizer Power Operated Relief Valves (PORVs)

2 RCS *PCV 455 C and D and 2 RCS* PCV 456, the following observations were made. During Hot Functional Testing, P0-2.06.06 and .08 were performed. These tests showed that PCV455C and 456 did not stroke consistentl Westinghouse recommended that the valves be ;

disassembled and inspected for abnormal conditions. Upon inspection, '

after disassembly, light scoring was detected on th J L valve plug. Both plug and seat were' machined (3 and 7 mils l

respectively for PCV4550 and 3 and 6.5 miles for PCV 456). Th ;

valves were then inspected by a vendor (Crosby) representative and reassembled under his supervisio ,

In June, 1987, PCV 4550 and PCV 456 experienced problems opening at low pressure. Maintenance (DLC) requested that the solenoid l orifices be removed and that the valves be tested with nitrogen.

l Westinghouse concurred with this recommendatio The solenoid l orifiecs were removed and all.of the valves (PORVs) were tested l successfully. Currently the PORVs are in normal system arrangement with no apparent problem ;

.________ _ _- _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . - - - - _ - - -

.

l l

-

8 l Reference: Memorandum from J. Kasunick (DLC) to H, van Kessel (NRC)

dated July 24, 1987, " Crosby Relief Valves" l Conclusions Apart from possible small leakages from the Pressurizer Safety Valves, there are no apparent leakage or operational problems with the Safeties and the PORV .2 Duplex Lube Oil Strainer for Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs)

Scope The newly installed temporary lube oil strainers on both EDGs were inspected together with the drawings documentation for their installatio Discussion All of the strainer elements for the two new strainers were received and installed. The new temporary lube oil systems were tested and 1 put into operations successfull No apparent problems were encountered. The inspector inspected both installations and found it to be installed in accordance with the drawings and documentation of the work package, Conclusion with the succe sful completion of the lube oil system modifications to a duplex arrangement the inspector has no further questions on this system, 5. QA/QC Interface l Scope The participation of the Duquesne Light QA Surveillance Group in the preoperational test program was evaluated by the inspector. The Surveillance Checklists listed in Attachment B were reviewed for adherence to the requirements of the Startup Manual (SUM)

Discussion None of the surveillance check lists (2) of Attachment B show any unsatisf actory entrie '

Findings The inspector has no questions on the QA documents of Attachment B.

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

_ ___ _ _ ___

.

l

.

l 6. Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in f order to determine whether they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance, )

or a deviation. New unresolved items in this report are identified in !

paragraph i

7. Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection, on July 24, 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 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 l l

l

!

I

1

i

.

.

Attachment A 50-412/87-53 Test Results Evaluation

,

Approval Date Proc. N Title Rev. No. TRR by JTG P0-2.01A.04 Safeguards Test Cabinet Actuation 0 7-11-87 P0-2.06.06 PRT and PORV 0 7-17-87 l P0-2.06.07 Pressurizer Pressure and Level 0 7-09-87

!

(Sect. A) f

{

(Retest 6-006) l P0-2.13.01 Recirc. Spray Pumps and Controls 0 7-12-87 l l

PO-2.16.01 Suppl. Leak Collection and Release Test 0 7-13-87 PO-2.24B.01 MD-Aux Feedwater Pumps Controls 0 7-13-87 P0-2-24C.01 Steam Generator Level 0 7-01-87 (Retest 24C-1,2,3)

P0-2.36A.02 Electrical A/C Independence Test 0 7-09-87 P0-2.44F.01 Misc. Safety Related HVAC 0 7-15-87 (

l (

.

.

.

.

Attachment B 50-412/87-53 Review QA Surveillance Reports I

Surveillance {

Surv. No Proc. N Procedure Title Comp 1. Date j

)

'

POT-968-87' P0-2.47.10 Equipment Hatch Emergency 7-14-87 Airlock POT-30-87 P0-2.03.01 Incore Thermo Couple and 7-21-87  ;

(Sect. D+E) RTD Cross Calibration '

l

,

i I

i

!

.__._____________._____________a