IR 05000413/1986021

Insp Repts 50-413/86-21 & 50-414/86-24 on 860508-13,19-23 & 27-29.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Precritical Data,Witnessing of Initial Criticality & Witnessing of Startup

ML20207J583
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	07/14/1986
From:	Burnett P, Mathis J, Matt Thomas NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20207J575	List: IR 05000413/1986021 ML20207J573
References
50-413-86-21, 50-414-86-24, NUDOCS 8607290178
Download: ML20207J583 (6)

Text

- _ _

-)

• UNITED STATES

'

[P EtY ^

o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 11 y -

g g j 101 MARIETTA STREET, * '* ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

\s.../

Report Nos.: 50-413/86-21 and 50-414/86-24 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35 and NPF-52 Facility Name: Catawba 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: May 8-13, 19-23, and 27-29, 1986 Inspectors ~2wM / 6/g gdtvSigned

~

P' T. 'BurTeEt 7I1 6 % :,

M Amn ~

7/M/24 tate' Signed

-

\.ThomasJ

. v. J.0L. Mathis

_ 7 /n/e6 Date Signed Accompanying Pers el: . . Long Approved tyft 19 .

filf!/ 7lVfhd'

M F. Jape, Section Chief Oate' Signed Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection addressed the areas of review of precritical data, witnessing of initial criticality, witnessing of startup tests and review of proposed tests for Unit 2, and review of surveillance tests for Unit Results: No violations or deviations were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000413 0 PDR

.

.

REPORT DETAILS

. Persons Contacted Licensee Employees J. W. Hampton, Station Manager

1. A. S. Bhatnagar, Test Engineer

• H. B. Barron, Superintendent of Operations

1. • J. W. Cox, Superintendent of Technical Services

• W. F. Beaver, Performance Engineer

1. C. S. Gregory, IAE Support Engineer

1. • C. L. Hartzell, Compliance Engineer

• S. W. Brown, Reactor Engineer

1. • D. Tower, Shift Operating Engineer

1. • J. H. Knuti, Operating Engineer - Document Development R. G. Blessing, Engineer - Reactor M. A. Geckle, Engineer - Test T. W. Deese, Engineer - IAE

1. M. Hawes, Engineer - Reactor P. LeRoy, Licensing Engineer

1. • F. P. Schiffley, Licensing Engineer

1. G. Smith, Superintendent of Maintenance

1. J. Stackley, IAE Engineer D. Wellbaum, Engineer - Reactor Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, operators, security force members, and office personne Other Organization i

M. D. Heibel, Westinghouse S. C. Vaughn, Westinghouse NRC Resident Inspectors

.

1. • P. S. Skinner, Senior Resident Inspector

'

• P. K. Van Doorn, Senior Resident Inspector l

1. • M. S. Lesser, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview on May 13, 198 # Attended exit interview on May 23, 198 . Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 13 and 23,1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No l

l s

/ 1

.

.

dissenting comments were received from the licensee. Proprietary material was reviewed by the inspectors, but is not included in this repor . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio . Unresolved Items No unresolved items were identifie . Review of Precritical Tests (72596)

The following completed precritical test procedures were reviewed: TP/2/A/2600/07, Rod Cluster Control Assembly Drop Time Test - Phase 2, was performed at full flow, four reactor coolant pumps running, hot conditions, 551 F and 2239 psig, on May 1-5, 1986. The inspectors independently analyzed seven of the rod crop visicorder traces and obtained drop times within 0.02 seconds of those recorded by the licensee. The slowest drop time reported by the licensee was 1.66 seconds, which was well within the 3.3 second limit of Technical Specification 3.1. b' . PT/2/A/4150/010, NC System Leakage Calculation, is required to be performed cycry three days with the reactor coolant system above mode 5 to satisfy Technical Specification 4.4.6.2. The inspectors examined station records beginning March 31, 1986 and continuing through May 22, 1986, and found the surveillance requirements to be satisfied with respect to frequency and result. Beginning on April 2, 1986, a separate calculation was performed for nuclear coolant drain tank (NCDT) and pressurizer relief tank (PRT) leakages rather than performing them contemporaneously with the gross leakage measurement.

! PT/0/B/4150/20A, Westinghouse Reactivity Computer Checkou PT/0/B/4150/208, IBM 9000 Reactivity Computer Checkou Additionally, the inspectors reviewed the Unit 2 Operators Log for the 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> immediately preceding beginning the approach to initial criticalit No log entries indicated any problems with required systems. Shutdown margin, reactor coolant system leakage, and boron concentration were monitored with appropriate frequency and found acceptable. The log also confirmed that the unit was properly staffed

and the source range nuclear instruments were on scale.

i No violations or deviations were identified.

l l

I l

r 1

.

.

6. Witnessing of Initial Criticality on Unit 2 (72500)

The inspectors witnessed most of the boron dilution stage of the approach to criticality as well as the criticality proper. The test was performed using PT/2/A/4150/19,1/M Approach to Criticality, which achieved that end in a well-controlled manner. Subsequently, the all-rods-out critical boron concentration was measured using PT/2/A/4150/10, Boron Endpoint Measurement. The result, 975 ppmB, was in excellent agreement with the predicted, acceptance criterion, value of 966 +/- 50 ppm No violations or deviations were identifie . Zero Power Physics Tests (72572, 72302)

This phase of startup testing was guided by TP/2/A/2100/02, Controlling Procedure for Zero Power Physics Testing. Portions of most of the tests performed were witnessed by the inspectors anc all of the completed procedures were reviewed. These included: PT/2/A/4150/11A, Control Rod Worth Measurement by Boron Dilution, was witnessed in part by the inspectors. The inspectors then independently delogged raw data from the recorder traces of the reactivity computer, and used the SUPERCALC 3 spreadsheet program to analyze and plot the results in the form of a differential reactivity worth curv That curve, which compares the results obtained with those reported by the license, is an attachment to this report, PT/2/A/4150/118, Control Rod Worth Measurement by Rod Swap, was performed over the period May 9 - 10, 1986, and was witnessed in part by the inspector For all of the rod worth measurements, the differences between measured and predicted values ranged from -0.1 % to

+2.2 %. PT/2/A/4150/12A, Isothermal Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity Measurement, was performed with all rods out on May 9, 1986. The inspectors independently verified the result of -1.81 pcm/ F, from which a moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity of -0.08 pcm/ F was inferred by subtracting the calculated doppler coefficient of -1.73 pcm/ PT/2/A/4150/20, Temporary Rod Withdrawal Limit Determination, was performed on May 9, 1986, to enforce an administrative limit that the moderator temperature coefficient be at least as negative as -1 pcm/ The limiting ARO boron concentration was established at 821 ppmB. The withdrawal limits will be enforced until a burnup of 3000 mwd /Te has been achieve PT/2/A/4150/05, Core Power Distribution - Hot Zero Power - All Rods Out, was performed on May 11, 198 No anomalies in the power distribution were note ( 1

.

.

No violations or deviations were identifie . Unit 1 Surveillance Tests (61708, 61728)

. PT/1/A/4150/128, Isothermal Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity Measurement at End of Life, was performed with the average boron concentration at 293 ppmB. There was one step of rod motion during the cooldown portion of the test and two steps during the dilution portio The inspectors agreed with the licensee's analysis that the rod motion had an insignificant effect on the test result The moderator temperature coefficient derived from the measurement was -22.2 pcm/ F, which was well above the limit of -28 pcm/ F imposed by Technical Specification 4.1.1. PT/1/A/4150/010, NC System Leakage Calculation, and PT/1/A/4150/01F, NC System Leakage to NCDT/PRT Calculation, were reviewed for the period April 6 to May 1, 1986. The first PT makes use of a background leakage from the unit open items summary log. That log was reviewed with the aid of a reactor operator, who was fully familiar with its contents and applications. The log includes measured leakage for NC system valves identified by valve number and leak rate in ml/ mi During the period reviewed, NC system leakage was monitored with the proper frequency, and with acceptable results, the unidentified leakage was less than 1 gp No violations or deviations were identifie . Unit 2 Power Ascension Test Procedure Review (72582, 72583)

l

The inspectors reviewed test procedures TP/2/A/2650/03, Loss of Control Room l

Test, and TP/2/A/2650/12, Station Blackout Tes The procedures were

'

reviewed for consistency with applicable sections of FSAR Chapters 8 and 14, ( Regulatory Guides 1.68 and 1.68.2, and Technical Specification The l procedures were also reviewed for conformance to administrative control Some questions were raised concerning the loss of control room test. The questions pertained to the load on the generator at the time of the test being consistent with that specified in Regulatory Guide 1.68, and the minimum shift personnel used to perform the test being consistent with that specified in the combined Technical Specifications for Catawba Units 1 and 2, with both units in an operation mode higher than mode Discussions with licensee personnel resulted in procedural changes being issued for the loss of control room test that resolved the question There were no questions raised with the station blackout test, which was performed on May 27, 198 Review of the test results will be completed during a later inspection .

No violations or deviations were identified.

t

'

Attachment:

Control Rod Bank B l

L

k" ATTACHMENT ]

Control Rod Bank E

~

-

Differential Worth (pem/ step)

'

~-

6- O Inspector d sji X Licensee

6-c  :

t o .

%

$ 4- '

a2

~

m

\

'

O

! \

2-l 0 . . . . . . . .

0 25 51 76 101 127 152 177 203 228 Average Bank Position (steps)

- -. .-

,