IR 05000412/1987067

Insp Rept 50-412/87-67 on 871119-25.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Startup Test Program,Power Ascension Tests & Test Results

ML20147C784
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	12/28/1987
From:	Murphy K, Wen P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20147C774	List: IR 05000412/1987067 ML20147C769
References
50-412-87-67, NUDOCS 8801190341
Download: ML20147C784 (9)

Text

.

. - _ _ ___ __ _ ____

,

i I .

-

'

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

I Report N /87-J7 Docket N License No. NPF-73 Licensee: Duquesne Light Company ~

Post Office Box 4 ,

Shippingport, Pennsylvan n 15077 }

Facility Name: Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: November 19-25, 1987 ,

Inspectors: / '

, /, /z / 7 Peter'K%<i, Resctfr Engineer, ORS date/ /7 Approved by: /[ Iyc//

K. CW'MU/ptiy/Ycting Chief,

/>

dati j/[7

/

Special Test Programs Section, EB, E15 Inspection Summary: Inspection on November 19-25, 1987 (Inspectior. Report No. 50-412/87-67) .

Areas Inspected: Startup Test Program, Power Ascension Tests anc cest result Results: No violations were identifie ,

NOTE: For acronyms not defined, refer to NUREG-0544, "Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms."

8801190341 880107 2 PDR ADOCK 0500

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

'

OETAILS .

1.0 Persons Contacted

-

Duquesne Light c ompany R. Bernier, Senior Test Engineer

• J. Godleski, TCT Engineer J. Houghton, Consulting Engineer

• 0. Hunkele, Director, Quality Assurance Operations

• J. D. Johns, Superviscr, Quality Assurance Surveillance T. F. McGourty, Principle Engineer

• T. P. Noonan, Assistant Plant Manager R. Oliveri, Test Er.gineer G. L. Shildt, Senior Test Engineer

• 0. G. Szucs, Lead Compliance Engineer

• R. Wargo, Assistant Director Quality Control

• G. Williams, Principle Engineer

• T. G. Zyra, Director, Site Test and Plant Perfort..ance Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation

• Wittschen, Licensing Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission

• J. Boall, Senior Resident Inspector The inspector also contacted other administrative and technical licensee in personnel during the course of the inspectio ' Denotes those present at the exit meeting held on November 25, 1987, 2.0 Power Ascer.sion Teting 2.1 Startup Test Program The licensee completed the 100-hour warranty run inti Leclared Unit 2 in commercial operation on November 17, 1987. The majority of the startup tests have been completed. However, some tests, primarily of secondary, non-safety related systeras, were oeferred due to test schedule restraints. These test deferrals were reviewed and approved by the Joint Test Group (JTG) and Onsite Safety Commit'.ee (OSC). The ir.spector rev'ewed the a,sociated C C."P O.59 safety evaluations and concurred with the licensee's conclusion that these test deferrals have no unreviewed safety questions involved. The licensee uses test log ent?,es and a station planning schedule to track these deferred tests until their completio The inspector informed a licensee representative that the following deferred items had impact on the plant operations:

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

.

,

-3-

Since the Steam Generator Moisture Carryover Test (S0V-2.21A.01)

had not oeen completed, the value of moisture carryover (0.25%)

used in the Thermal Power Calorimetric procedure (IST-2.02.06)

was not a conservative approach. The associated uncertaint> in the full power determination is about 0.2% of fall power. At the end of this inspection period, the inspector reviewed a revised IST-2.02.06 procedure, and noted that the licensee has corrected this ite * The overall reactor coolant resistance temperature detector (RTO) response time was not obtained in the 100% plant trip test. The licensee tracked this test deficiency via retest log 4-002 by directing I&C to connect a memvry type strip chart recorder to the RTO outputs. The inspector toured the Primary Process Rack Room and noted that these ins'.rumentations were in place. The required data can 've obtained when the next reactor trip occurs from 100% power. Until this data is available, the licensee continues to operate the plint with overtemperature delta T and overpower delta T setpoints reduced 3% below the TS allowed value The startup testing program is essentially complete Tests were accomplished in accordance with approved procedure Test identified problems were properly disseminated to the a>propriate groups for action. Test deficiencies were followed up for resolution and were found acceptablo. Overall, the licensee per firmance in the test area is considered effective and acceptabl Test Results Review Those test results listed in Attachment A were reviewed by the inspector to verify tha+:

• test changes were approved and implemented :n accordance with

administrative proceduros;

• cc.anges diq not im?act the basic objectives of the test;

!

• test deficiencies and exceptions were properly identified and resolved;

• the cogr.izant engineerino group had evaluated the test results

'

and signified that tbo test demonstrated design conditions were l met; and,

• test r2sults comparea satisfactorily with established

accr.ptance criteria or ws e properly resolved.

l l

,

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

, ,

..

>

.

,

-4-o o

All test results reviewed satisfied the above attributes.

-

No unacceptable conditions were identifie .3 Followup of Anomalies Identified During Previous Tests Anomalies-identified during startup tests were documented in the

. previous startup test inspections. The inspector verified that these anomalies were resolved or followed up by the cognizant licensee ,

group, as discussed below:

pressurizer (PZR) Bypass Spray Valves Flow The -licensee's inability to maintain the PZR spray line temperature above the low temperature alarm setpoint of 530'F through normal bypass spray vave flow was identified in a previous test. Adequate spray line temperature is needed to maintain the piping and spray nozzle within specified design limit Since identifying the problem, the lii:ensee has operated the system by utilizing the PZ back-up heaters to maintain a spray valve (PCV 445A or PCV 455 B) in a throttled position which ensures that the spray line temperature is kept above 530 F.

~

In the previous inspection, the inspector expressed his concern of ,

using this operating strategy in the long term (until the first '

refueling outage) without performing an adequate evaluation. During

-

this inspection period, the inspector discussed this issue with

licensee representatives from the Engineering Department and the Licensing Group. The inspector was informed that the licensee had assessed this concern and concluded that there was no safety  :

,

questions involved. The inspector had no further questions.

i Operating Procedure on the Resetting of Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP) -

Underfrequency Relay i All 3 RCPs tripped during the Net load Rejection Test (IST-2.04.06),  ;

which was performed on October 24, 1987. Due to unclear operating .

. procedure guidance for the resetting of the underfrequercy relay, the '

!

RCPs were unable to be restarted until I hour and 18 minutes later.

! The licensee later initiated an Operating Manu11 Change Notice L (2-87-709). The inspector reviewed the change and determined that a

clear instruction for resetting the RCP bus underfrequency relays had been added in OM 2.6.4 Section AAA.

'

The most recent event involving the loss of all 3 RCPs occurred on November 17, 198 Subsequent to this event, the RCPs were restarted within 5 minutes utilizing tne revised Operating Manual instruction '

!

The inspector had no further question l

'

i i

4 3' + ., -. . - _ _ . _ -. . , . - . - . . . , . - ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . __ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

-5-Reactor Coolant System Water Inventory Balance The inspector performed an independent RCS leak rate calculation during the previous inspection (50-412/87-57) and determined that the licensee's icak rate calculation results were consistently more conservative than the inspector's. Some portions of the instruction for the identified leak rate calculation, however, were not clea During this inspection period, the inspector reviewed the licensee's revised surveillance procedure (OST 2.6.2), and noted that clearer guidance for the identified leak rate determination had been adde The revised guidelines included instructions specifying that no credit be taken for a decrease in drain tank level during the tes The plant has recently experienced excessive RCS valve leakage on October 20 and 31, 1987. In both cases, the licensee's RCS Water Inventory Balance surveillance procedure was able to identify the excessive RCS leakag The inspector had no further question Resolution of Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump (TDAFP)

Test Deficiencies The inspector reviewed the Test Results Report for Test N P0-2.248.02, "Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Test", with specific emphasis devoted to the licensee's resolution of previously identified test def.ciency reports (TDR). The inspector discussed the resolution of TDR No. 33 which identified high humidity values in the South Safeguards area during operation of the TDAFP. This deficiency was caused by opening the turbine casing and steam inlet line drain valves more than the required 1/4 - 1/2 tur The licensee satisfactorily corrected the operating manual procedures to correctly position these valves. The inspector questioned the opera-tions personnel as to whether the procedure changes were verified as satisfactorily resolving TDR No. 33 during the recent performance of the TDAFP operational surveillance test (OST). The inspector was advised by the surveillance test coordinator that the excessive humidity problem did not resurface in the recent monthly surveillance test performed on November 10, 1987. The inspector considered this acceptable and had no further question Test Deficiencies of the Net load Rejection Test As documented in the previous NRC startup test inspection report, 50-412/87-63, three major test deficiencies were identified during the performance of this test: (1) reactor tripped on lo-lo S/G level, (2) all 3 RCPs tripped on underfrequency immediately following the reactor trip / turbine trip, and (3) a partial loss of offsite power occurred during the fast bus transfer. These test deficiencies are di.:ussed below:

l

.

. . .

. .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

-6-(1) The licensee and Westinghouse had determined that the inadequate Tref input signal during the test had prevented the steam dump valves from fully opening. Only two out of the four banks of I steam dump valve had fully opened. The insufficient steam l

relief through the steam dump system caused the excessive S/G 1evel shrink, and resulted in the reactor tri Although the test failed to demonstrate the plant's 100% load rejection capacity, there was no safety concern. The safety i

valves did not lift, and ESFAS was not challenged. It was also determined that the steam dump system responded correctly to the Tref input signal sensed during the tes (2) The cause of the bus underfregency was attributed to the inherent turbine EHC response under this unique test configura-tion (both generator output breakers were open for the test).

Immediately following the generator output breaker open, the unit's EHC successfully limited the overspeed conditio However, it could not regulate the turbine speed as the turbine started slowing down, thus generating an underf requency conditio The inspector discussed the potential of losing all 3 RCPs during operations with the plant managemen The inspector was informed by the assistant plant manager that the probability of having both generator output breakers open is very remote and no corrective actions are considered necessar (3) The net load rejection test also revealed a fast bus transfer problem. Thirty (30) second after the turbine trip, the generator trip signal opened the main generator exciter breaker and initiated a fast bus transfer to the offsite power sources. Only Busses 2C and 20 transferred smoothl It took about 1.5 seconds for Bus 2A to complete the transfe Bus 2B failed to initial transfer and was manually transferred by the operator about 16.5 seconds late The design flaw in the fast bus transfer scheme also caused a temporary loss of offsite power for about 17 seconds on November 17, 1987. A detailed investigation of bot' events and the licensee's corrective actions are described in the special NRC team inspection 50-412/87-68.

l 3.0 Independent Calculation / Verification The inspector independently verified the Sequence of Events and test data obtained during the Net load Rejection Test (IST-2.04.06). The causes of reactor trip due to inadequate steam dump response was verified. The inspector had no further questions

- - - - - _ _-_______

. -. . . ._ .. _

.

,

un

.

. r-7-  !

-

4.0 'QA/QC Interface The licensee QA Surveillance Group has continuously provided test coverage for the startup test program. Through direct-observation and-

,

discussion with the QA supervisor, the inspector noted that QA personnel had. effective interface with'other departments. The inspector reviewed the surveillance deficiency reports and noted that no unacceptable-issues were pendin .0 Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings

,

(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-41275'/-53-01): ~ Pressurizer Spray Line Temperature Problem-

~

The pressurizer spray line temperature problem had been followed up through various startup test inspections, for example, 50-412/87-55 and 87-62. As discussed in Section 2.2, the licensee currently is using the pressurizer backup heaters to maintain a spray valve open, and subsequently ,

,

heat the spray line to a-temperature above the alarm setpoint of 530 ,

The licensee had performed an engineering assessment and concluded that ,

this operating' strategy had no adverse impact on the plant safety. Based on this information, this item is close (Closed) Unresolved Item (50-412/87-38-01) Preoperation Test Deficiency Review -

4 Through discussion with a licensee cognizant test engineer and review of test deficiency tracking log, the inspector noted that all previously ,

identified Preoperation (P0) Test Deficiencies were either resolved or *

followed up by the licensee's Test and Plant Performance Group. There  !

are 4 PO tests that will be deferred until the first refueling outag l

,

These tests are: -

PO-2,20.01 Fuel Pooling System Test P0-2.20.02 Spent Fuel Pool and Refueling Cavity Leak Test -

P0-2.66.01 Fuel Handling Equipment i P0-2.66.02 Cranes and Lifting Equipment Test Adequate safety evaluations had been performed to justify these test ,

deferrals. Since these test deferrals have no safety impact on the ,

current plant operations and there is reasonable assurance that these tests will be completed, this item is close ,

6.0 Exit Meeting

'

An exit meeting was held on November 25, 1987 to discuss the inspection scope and findings, as detailed in this report (see paragraph 1.0 for

attendees).

,

.

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

.

.

-8-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, it was determined that this report does not concain information subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restriction ,

l o

ATTACHMENT A Test Results Evaluation

--

IST-2.03.03 Measurement of Core Parameters During Steady-State Conditions

--

IST-2.04.06 Verification of Plant Performance Following Plant Load Rejection / Trip (Section B - The Net Load Rejection Test)

--

IST-2.07.02 Failed Fuel Detection System Test

--

IST-2.02.05 Alignment of Process Temperature Instruments

--

IST-2.01A.08 Full Power Demonstration Test (100-Hour Warranty Run)

--

IST-2.02.01 Alignment of Nuclear Instrumentation System

--

IST-2.02.04 Power Coefficient Measurement

--

50V-2.34.04 Containment Instrument Air Design Verification Test

--

S0V-2.44C.05 Containment Air Recirculation Fans Test (Containment Air Temperature Verification)

--

BVT-2.1-8.49.1 Power Distribution Limit Check (100% Power Flux Map)

--

BVT-2.1-1. Incore/Excore Axial Imbalance Monthly Check (100%

Power)

l