IR 05000414/1985054

Insp Rept 50-414/85-54 on 851021-25.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Procedure Review,Preoperational Test Witnessing & Review of Previously Identified Inspector Followup Items

ML20137A370
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	11/07/1985
From:	Jape F, Matt Thomas NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137A359	List: IR 05000414/1985054 ML20137A355
References
50-414-85-54, NUDOCS 8511250478
Download: ML20137A370 (4)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. j UNITED STATES

. ,
* truq*
,  o . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
*
 '
[*
 -
  ,. REGloN 11 g  j  101 MARIETTA STREET, *  2  ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 s
 **~g
*e s,,e Report No.: 50-414/85-54
~

Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242

.

Docket No.: 50-414 License No.: CPPR-117 Facility Name: Catawba 2 Inspection Conducted: October 21-25, 1985 Ins'pector: I) //[7//f Date Signed A M. Thomas g Accompanying Personnel: W. S. Kim, and Y. H. Ryu of the Korean Advanced Energy Research Institute-Approved by: A b AF. Jape, Section Chief, Test Programs Section

      '[[pf
      ~

Date Signed

 # Engineering Branch Division _of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 36 inspector-hours on site in the ' areas of preoperational test procedure review, preoperational test

, witnessing, and review of previously identified inspector followup items (IFI).

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

. 8511250478 851113 PDR G ADOCK 05000414

,    PDR

_ F t

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees-J. W. Hampton, Station Manager

* B. Barron, Operations Superintendent W. F. Beaver, Performance Engineer J. W. Cox, Technical Services Superintendent
* L. Hartzell, Compliance Engineer R. A. Jones, Unit 2 Test Engineer
*P. G. LeRoy, Licensing Enginee *F. P. Schiffley II, Licensing Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included test coordinators, engineers, technicians, operators, security force members, and office personne NRC Resident Inspectors
*P. H. Skinner, Senior Resident Inspector, Operations
*P. K. VanDoorn, Senior Resident Inspector, Construction
* Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 25, 1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio . -Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during the inspectio . Preoperational Test Procedure Review (70304, 70305, 70306)

The inspector reviewed the preoperational (preop) tests listed below to verify that they were consistent with applicable portions of FSAR Chapters 6, 7, 8, 9, and 14; Technical Specifications; Safety Evaluation Report and its supplements; Regulatory Guides 1.68, 1.79, and 1.108. The following procedures were reviewed:

r--_- s

'

TP/2/A/1350/09A, Diesel Generator Load Sequencer Preoperational Test

  - Train A TP/2/A/1450/11, Containment Air Return and Hydrogen Skimmer System TP/2/A/1600/03, Solid State Protection System Functional Test The procedures were reviewed for conformance to administrative control This included verifying that pertinent prerequisites were identified, initial test conditions and system status were specified, acceptance criteria specified, the requiied reviews were performed, and management approval was indicate No violations or deviations were identified in the areas inspecte . Preoperational Test Witnessing (70312, 70315, 70316, 70317)

The inspector witnessed portions of the preop tests discussed belo The tests were witnessed to observe that:

.

Appropriate revisions of the procedures were available and in use by test personne Test prerequisites were me Personnel involved in the tests were briefed prior to beginning the test Proper piant systems were in servic Special test equipment was calibrated and in servic The tests were performed in accordance with requirement Adequate coordination among the personnel involved in the test Test data were collected and recorded in the proper manne Problems encountered during testing were properly identified and documented for evaluatio The following tests were observed:

-

TP/2/A/1350/09A, Sections 12.15 and 12.16. Section 12.15 verifies proper operation of the committed sequence for blackout only loading and the load shed logic due to a sustained blackout on the 4160 volt essential and blackout switchgea Section 12.16 verifies proper operation of the common blackout and loss of coolant accident (LOCA) logi ! i l

      )

!

.
"

-

TP/2/A/1450/11. Sections 12.1, 12.2, and 15.8. Section 12.1 verified containment air return fan (CARF) 2A fan motor current and fan speed are within acceptance criteria specified. Sections 12.2 and 1 verify proper operation of the dampers and CARFs 2A and 28, respectively, due to an auto start signal with a simulated containment pressure > 0.2 A containment pressure of 10.25 psig is simulated and it is verified that the dampers operate properly and the CARFs sto TP/2/A/1600/03, Sections 12.2 and 13.10 which test the solid state protection system (SSPS) logic. Section 12.2 was being performed per SSPS periodic test IP/0/A/3200/02A for train A and IP/0/A/3200/028 for train No violations or deviations were identified in the areas inspecte . Followup on Previously Identified Inspection Findings (92701)

(0 pen) IFI 414/85-42-02, concerning resolution of discrepancies identified during performance of the auxiliary shutdown panel (ASP) cooldown test. In reviewing the discrepancies, the inspector noted that discrepancy No. 44 was written when letdown valves 2NV10A and 2NV849 both remained open during transfer of control to the AS In discussing this matter, licensee personnel stated that these valves, which are not open during normal opera-tion, performed as required by design drawings. The valves that are controlled form the ASP are letdown valves 2NV11A and 2NV13A. The question was raised whether valves 2NV10A and 2NV849 would spuriously open if there were a fire in the control room (even through they are normally closed) and whether this would be an uncontrolled letdown path. The licensee stated that this discrepancy will be reviewed for applicability to both Units 1 and 2 and appropriate corrective actions will be taken as needed. The inspector informed the licensee that the IFI will remain open and will be reviewed during. subsequent inspection No' violations or deviations were identified in the areas inspected.

}}