IR 05000416/1981024
| ML20010F133 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1981 |
| From: | Burnett P, Hunt M, Matt Thomas NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010F118 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-416-81-24, NUDOCS 8109090405 | |
| Download: ML20010F133 (4) | |
Text
C
.
..
.
wm
- [p uee o
UNITE 9 STATES
-
g
-!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
d
'E REGION 11
'
o 101 MARIETTA ST N.W.. Sulf E 3100
-%g.....,g#
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-416/81-24 Licensee:
Mississippi Power and Light Compa. y, Jackson, Mississippi 39205 Facility Name:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Docket No. 50-416 License No. CPPR-118 Inspection at Grand Gulf Nuclear Power Plant near Port Gibson, Mississippi Inspectors: /
- /w>x,,,Wshz. -
f..2.7-[{
M. D.' Hunt
~ ~
//
Date Signed
/
97, wen 7_ 21 FI M. Thoma Date igned
/a Approved by: [ [
,j/,pa 2-.22-@
P. T. Burnett, Actin'g Se.+. ion Chief Date Signed
~
Engineering Inspection E.*anch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY
,
!
Inspection on July 7-10, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 59 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of preoperational testing, independent inspection and licensee preopera-tional test procedure review.
,
Results Of the three areas inspected, no violations were identified in two areas; one violation was found in one area (416/81-24-01, Draw!.1g control (Paragraph 5)).
,
8109090405 810','03'
~
PDR ADOCK 05000416 Q
PDR g
, -
_. _ - -
e~
,
,<
,
.
.
_
,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
' Licensee Employees
- C. K. McCoy, Plant Manager
- G. B, Rogers, Sits Manager
- C, L. Stuart, Asst. Plant Manager
- C. R. Hutchinson, Startup Supervisor
- J. W. Yelverton, QA Supervisor
- J. C. Bell, 0A Engineer
- S. F. Tanner, QA Coordinator
.0ther licensee employees contacted included 8 con 3truction craftsmen, 3 technicians, and 3 office personnel.
Other Organizations
- L. E. Blakeslee, Field Er'gineer Administrction, Bechtel Power Corporation
,
- R. W. Frayer, Checkout and Turnover Section, Bechtel Power Corporation R. A. Wheeler, Project Startup Engineer, Bechtel Power Corporation C. Rayford, Document Control Supervisor, Bechtel Power Corporation M. G. Farschon, Site Operations Manager, General Electric Corporation
" Attended exit interviev 2.
Exit Interview
.
'
ine inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 10, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
b.
Independent Inspection Effort The inspectors conducted a walk through examination of Unit I reactor building, the control building and the diesel generator building. During this examination the inspectors found that the licensee has established a program to control personnel access in certain area.
,
.
.,
._
x
- l L;o}W
^
-
-,
.-
'
s
'While inspecting.tne control room the inspectors questioned the method of separation-of divisional and non-divisional cables.. During followup the
. inspectors reviewed ~various controlled vendor' drawings issued to the field -
l-
'by Bechtel Document Control Center-(DCC). While review'ng these drawings, the inspector found the fellowing controlled drawings were from 1 to 3 revisions behind that shown in the Bechtel DCC master document log:
DRAWING NUMBER FIELD aEVISION DCC LOG REVISION 865E506 Sheet 2
9 865E506 Sheet 3
9 865E608 Shett 5
9
66CE826 Sheet 7
7 865E834 Sheet 2
12
,
137D7404 Sheet 1
2
!
j:
Bechtel construction procedure WP/P-4 Document Control, Rev. 7, requires
that the latest revistan of controlled dccuments as -shown in the master dc,cument log, be issued. Tais requirement was not met as shown by the above l
drawings. After discussing this item with licensee representatives, the
!
inspector informed the licensee that this item wuld oe classified as a violation and would be identified as item 50-416/Cl-24-01, Drawing Control.
6.
Preoperational Testing i
The inspectcr reviewed the results of test 1L21PT01,125V ESF Batteries, Chargers & Distribution. The test had oeen completed prior to this inspec-
.
l tion.
During discussions with the licensee's testing perse1nel various
~
portions of the test were reviewed. The results indicated that the equip-ment performed the intended function and met the criteria set forth in FSAR L
Section 8.3.1.2.1, subsection a, paragraphs 5 and 6, and subsection b;
j Regulatory Guides 1.32, 1.68 and applicable IEEE standards.
l There were only 2 exceptions that were yet to be resolved. The overall test l
results are still in the review cycle for final acceptance. During the
review-of the preop test documents, the applicable drawings were examined.
The drawing revision levels were re iewed to determine that the drawings in v
use were current. Examination revealed that electrical drawing E-1041, R0, was on the current controlled drawing. racks but the drawing distribution.
l center which maintains all controlled documents had a 1ater revision (RI)
~
which stated thu:. the drawing had been su,,arceded by drawing E-0011. -This appears to be another example of violation 81-24-01 (see paragraph 5 of this report).
At the - time. of this inspection the impact on test 1L21PT01 by the test
' drawing being superceded could not be determined. The licensee will perform.
an evaluation to determine the status of the test results and impacted by
~
the drawing change. This will be idntified as an open item 416/81-24-02, effect of drawing change on preop test 1L21PT01.
~
,
-
,,
..-
--r
-
, - -.
g
-. -.
.,,--e
_ cs
.3
.
.
7.
Preoperational Test Procedure Review The inspector reviewed test procedure 1E12PT01 Rev.1, Residual Heat Removal System, to verify thet NRC requirements, licensee commitments and important system performance functions are adequately reflected in the test procedure.
Within the areas examined no violations were identified.
8.
Praperation Test Program Implementation The inspector held discussions with various members of supervision in the startup section.
Included among these personnel 7re representatives for the A-E and the NSSS supplier. The inspector reviewed the methods used by the licensee, A-E and NSSS supplier to review the preoperation test proce-dures and to review the test results at the completion of the test. The NSSS supplier assures that the test procedure conforms ta designed specifi-cations and the test results are reviewed ar.d approved by the engineering staff. The A-E approvais are the responsibility of the off-site engir. sering staff.
The licensee approvals are performed by the plant-op? rations tech-nical staff. Ir.cluded in t he licensee's review cycle is a review by the plant quality section foi conformance to the FSAR commitments, IEEE standards and regulatory guides.
lhe MP&L Startup Manual, Sections 5000 and 7000 provide the requirements for conduct of the tests as related to changes, tes_ personnel qualifications, interruption and contiruation of tests, documentation of significant events and unusual conditions, maintenance during and after testing and documenting test activities.
The inspector reviewed the certification for six testing personnel. Certi-
>
fication for five was current. The sixth person's certification had expired five months previously but had been renewed and up graded prior to this i n spec t. iuir.
Th2 licensee has developed a system that should prevent the lapse in personnel certifications in the future.
The licensee has also initiated actions (NCR) to review this situation and evaluate the performance of the individual during the period that his certification was not up te date.
Within the areas examined, no violations were identified.