IR 05000416/1981035
| ML20031G004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1981 |
| From: | Burnett P, Davenport K, Andrea Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031F989 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-416-81-35, NUDOCS 8110200632 | |
| Download: ML20031G004 (4) | |
Text
'o UNITED STATES
- .
'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$
I REGION 11 b[
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 o,
o ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-416/81-35 i
Licensee: Mississippi Power and Light Company Jackson, Mississippi Facility Name: Grand Gulf Docket No. 50-416 License No. CPPR-118 Inspection at Grand Gulf site near Port Gibson, MS Inspectors: Y k /L]
h<.ty /$ r Q-2 5'- f /
A. H. Johnson
/
Date Signed 0h~ '
up ~ '
~
br V" 2 Y ' V/
K.' E. Davenport Date Signed '
Approved bv:
I, [f/!l.c W/h 9-2 /-P/
P. Burnstt, Acting Sectiori Chief Date Signed Engineering Inspection Branch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY Inspection on September 8-11, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 64 inspector-hours on site in the areas of preoperational test procedure review, preoperational test witnessing, and plant tours.
'
Results
.
Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
- 8110200632 811001 PDR ADOCK 05000416 G
-
/
,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- G. B. Rogers, Site Manager
- C. R. Hutchinson, Startup Manager
- A. S. McCurdy, Technical Superintendent
- D. L. Hunt, Plant Quality Superintendent
- J. W. Yelverton, Quality Assurance Supervisor
'). C. Bell, QA Representative
- G. Johnson, Licensing (Plant)
- H. Murray, Plant QA Representative Other licensee employees contacted included startup engineers, shift supervisors, technicians and operators.
NRC Resident Inspector A. G. Wagner
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 11, 1981, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
>
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or devia-tions. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph 5.c.
5.
Preoperational Test Procedure Review and Test Witnessing a.
Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) System The inspector reviewed portions of Preoperational Test Procedure 1E51PT01, Revision 1, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling.
No violations or deviations were identified.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
- - - _
,
d
.
b.
Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT)
The inspectors reviewed portions of Preoperational Test Procedure 1-000-ST-01, DRAFT, Primary Containmert Integrated Leak Rate Test, including valve lineups.
No violations or deviations were identified.
c.
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System The inspector reviewed and witnessed the conduct of portions of Preoperational Test Procedure IE12PT01, Revision 1, Residual Heat Removal System, including RHR pump endurance run.
During the inspectors' review of FSAR Amendment 50, as compared to the completed valve stroke times of preoperational test RHR, E12PT01, Revision 1, the following valves do not meet the new specifications:
VALVE ACTUAL TIME PREOP FSAR AMEND. 50 (seconds)
(seconds)
(seconds)
F021B
less than 210
F290A 9.5 less than 30 8.0 F2908
less than 30 8.0 The following valves, although changed, meet specifications:
VALVE ACTUAL TIME PRE 0P FSAR AMEND. 50 (seconds)
(seconds)
(seconds)
F028A
90
F0288
90
F037A
240
F0378
240
F053A 22.5
24 F053B 23.5
24 F346
24
The licensee stated that appropriate action would be taken to verify that all preoperational test procedures will meet new criteria of FSAR Amendment 50. This is an inspector followup item (IFI) 416/81-35-01.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item 416/81-35-02: The inspector questioned how the plant staff performs a to.hnical review of FSAR Change Notices before the final amendments to the FSAR are issued by the Assistant Vice President, Nuclear Production of MFuL Compan.
.
The licensee stated that Technical Section Procedure, 09-S-01-15, Revision 1, Changes to FSAR/FER, Safety-Related, is used for initia-tion, review and implementation of changes to the Grand Gulf FSAR and FER. Sectien 6.2 FSAR/FER Change Notices, Step 6.2.1, states that
"When FSAR/FER Change Notices are received from the Nuclear Project Manager, the Licensing Engineer will review the document and determine who should conduct the technical review of the change notice. When the technical review is complete, he will return.the change notice to the Nuclear Project Manager along with plant staff comments".
Step 6.2.2.f. states that "after the change request is approved by the Plant Manager, the Licensing Engineer will conduct a final review to ensure all reviews and approvals are comolete. He will return the change notice to the Nuclear Project Manager with the plant staff comments".
The above reviews and approvals were not complete as of September 11, 1981 for change notices for FSAR Amendment 50, which was issued by MP&L on August _ 19, 1981. This item is considered unresolved pending inspec-tors' review of the plant administrative procedures and corporate procedures concerning control of plant licensing activities (Unresolved Item 416/81-35-01).
The following are the inspectors' concerns relating to the above:
(1) Failure to complete the necessary technical reviews and approvals of FSAR change notices for incorporation into FSAR amendments, prior to the final issuance of these amendments.
(2) Failure to obtain plant startup reviews of FSAR change notices for
,
incorporation of these changes into the preoperational tests.
(3) Failure of the MP&L Corporate Office to withhold issuance of FSAR amendments until the plant technical reviews of FSAR change notices are received.
No violations or deviations are issued at this time.
6.
Plant Tour The inspectors toured portions of the control building, auxiliary building, and containment. The tours were made at various times.
The inspectors observed work and operations in progress in the areas toured.
i
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
f a
f
- - -. -.. -.
- - - -
- - -
-,
-
-
- -,
-., - -, -
- -