IR 05000416/1982039
| ML20058B760 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1982 |
| From: | Burnett P, Jape F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058B758 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0612, RTR-NUREG-612 50-416-82-39, NUDOCS 8207260137 | |
| Download: ML20058B760 (8) | |
Text
i
UNITED STATES
o$
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
e REGION 11
o 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 Y
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 g.....o
.
.
Report No. 50-416/82-39
/'
Licensee: Mississippi Power and Light Company Jackson, MS 39205 Facility Name: Grand Gulf 1 Docket No. 50-416
,
"
- License No. CPPR-118 Inspect.on at Grand Gu ^ site near Port Gibson, MS
/
Inspector: _
f //fydy
.25 w /9k'2 P.
urnett date Signed
.
Approved by:
f a r,i 4/4C F. Jape, Section Cfief'
Date Signed Engineering Inspection Branch Division of Engineering and Technical Programs SUMMARY Inspection on May 3-6, and May 25-27, 1982
'
Areas Inspected This rout'ine, unannounced inspection involved fifty inspector-hours on site. The areas inspected included start-up test procedures, fueling readiness, and control of heasy loads.
Results No violations or deviations were identified.
8207260137 820628 PDR ADOCK 05000416 O
PDR J
.
.
REPORT DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- C. K. McCoy, Plant Manager C. L. Stuart, Assistant Plant Manager
- J. W. Yelverton, Nuclear Site QA Manager
,
- M. A. Lacey, 0A Consultant
- J. C. Roberts, Startup
- R. R. Weedon, Chemistry / Radiation Control Superintendent R. V. Moomew, I&C Superintendent A. S. McCurcly, Technical Superintendent W. R. Patterson, Reactor Engineering Supervisor E. H. Walsh, Maintenance Engineering Supervisor D. M. Beard, Maintenance Engineer B. F. Oglesby, Maintenance Engineer D. E. Johnson, Maintenance Engineer R. Kennedy, Surveillance Program Coordinator J. Warner, Shift Superintendent / Fueling Coordinator N. Salassi, I&C Foreman D. L. Hunt, Training Superintendent Other licensee employees contacted included two operators, one security force member, and three office personnel.
Other Organizations T. Enright, General Electric Company R. Cockrell, General Electric Company NRC Resident Inspector
A. Wagner, Senior Resident Inspector D. Scott, Resident Inspector
l l
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 27, 1982, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The issues addressed in detail included SRM and FLC operability (paragraph 5.c), plotting inverse multiplication curves (paragraph 5.b), re-rating cranes (paragraph 7.a) and inspection cf lif ting devices in accordance with ANSI N14.6 (paragraph 7.b).
.
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not ' inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unrosolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Startup Program a.
Procedures Reviewed The following procedures were reviewed:
1-000-SU-03-0, Fuel Loading, Revision 7, approved 2/22/82 (SU-03);
1-000-SU-04-0, Full Core Shutdown Margin Demonstration,
.
Revision 7, approved 2/22/82 (SU-04), and 1-C51-SU-06-0, SRM Performance, Revision 1, approved 2/20/82
.
(SU-06).
Subparts of Technical Specification 3.9, Refueling, are satisfactorily addressed in SU-03.
However, the proposed method of monitoring reactivity during fueling is not satisfactory and is addressed in subparagraph b below. Also, the method of establishing operability of source range detector (SRM) and fuel loading chamber (FLC) channels to be used with all three procedures does not prove quantitatively the proper functioning of the channels.
This issue is discussed further in subparagraph c below.
b.
Monitoring Inverse Multiplication 5U-03 on Data Sheet 4 prescribes that the counts observed on any combination of up to six SRMs and FLCs be averaged for each set of procedurally required observatic 3.
From the average, only a single plot of inverse multiplication would be made to monitor subcritical multiplication.
Licensee personnel stated that this was a GE-recommended procedure to eliminate the geometric effects usually observed in plotting inverse multiolication from a single detector. At other facilities these ef fects, such as coupling the source to a detector by the inter position of a fuel assembly, lead to an atypically large increase in count rate for that detector and delayed fuel loading while an evaluation was made of the observation.
Actually, with a number of detectors responding to the fuel increase and only one, at any one time, showing the geometric ef fect, evalua-tion, and resolution of the atypical observation would appear to be neither difficult nor time-consuming. Further, using a single plot of inverse multiplication appears contrary to the intent of proposed technical specification 3.9.2, which requires a minimum of two SRMs or FLCs with different geometries (.different core quadrants) be operable and responding for fueling operation. _ _ _
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
Yhis issue was raised at the exit interview on May 7, 1982. Licensee management agreed that multiple inverse-multiplication plots were desirable and would be performed. Changing SU-03 to require multiple inverse multiplication plots, each from a separate detector, will be tracked as inspector followup item 50-416/82-39-01.
c.
Confirming SRM and FLC System Operability In the procedures reviewed (SU-03 SU-04 and SU-06), the operative definition of SRM system operability is a signal-to-noise ratio greater than twa (S/N greater than 2) and three counts per second 'ndicated.
(S/N greater than 2 means simply that with the neutron sources installed the counting rates from these pulse-counting systems at least double over the background (source-free) rates.) These criteria in no way assure that the systems are producing a proportional (not necessarily calibrated) response to the neutron population. Without that assurance a proportional response to a change in population cannot be assumed.
NOTE:
This proportionality cannot be confirmed by using either fixed or variable rate electronic pulsers as input in place of the detectors.
The pulsers provide an equally-spaced constant-amplitude series of pulses.
The actual pulse distribution is randomly spaced with variable pulse heights.
That distribution presents more of a challenge to the signal processing capability of the circuitry.
A review of standard, readily-available references on the subject of pulse counting system leads to the conclusion that only a chi-squared statistical analysis can test and establish the operability of these systems. These reference are given below:
(1) Glenn F. Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., New York (1979), pp. 122-127.
(2) Dudley G.
Miller, Radioactivity and Radiation Detection, Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York (1972), pp. 97-99.
(3) William J. Price, Nuclear Radiation Detection, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1964), pp. 64-65.
(4) Arthur H.
Jaffey, " Statistical Tests for Counting", Nucleonics (November 1960), pp. 180-184.
To collect the data for the chi-squared it is necessary to have a pulse scaler for periodically observing the counting rate. Such a device is not provided by GE as a control room instrument.
This lack of instrumentation was discussed with members of the licensee's I&C department, who later determined that appropriate equipment may be available onsite. At the end of this inspection, this equipment and
..
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
-
_. _ -
.-.. _ -
-
. _ -
.
,
-
.
,.
!
i
'
!
its adaptability had not been checked out, nor had its use been coordinated with the reactor engineering department.
This latter department would be responsible for performing the chi-squared
)
analysis.
,
i At the exit interview, licensee management agreed that a method of quantitatively confirming SRM and FLC system operability would be
'
evaluated for use prior to fuel load. This is inspector followup item 50-416/82-39-02.
- 6.
Fueling Readiness l
The inspector reviewed the completed test procedure F15PT01, Refueling i
Equipment Preoperational Test, Revision 1.
Three exceptions to the test were outstanding at the close of this inspection. Management stated that
,
t the necessary retests were completed and that all were scheduled for PRSC review shortly.
!
The inspector raviewed the following administrative procedures addressed to fueling:
01-S-06-06, Fuel Management and Control, Revision 7;
.
01-S-06-10, Control of Refueling Operations, Revision 0; and
.
!
01-5-06-12, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Surveillance Program,
.
Revision 3.
Procedure 01-S-06-10 properly specifies and locates the fueling SRO, but
does not address the requirement for an operator at the controls of the fueling bridge. The requirements on qualifications of fueling personnel are addressed both in standard technical specifications and in the regulations.
IE Circular 80-21, Regulation of Refueling Crews, summarizes the applicable specifications and regulations and the manner in which they will be
)
inspected. This Circular was discussed with the fueling coordinator shortly
-
after his appointment on May 3,1982, and with licensee management at the
'
exit interview.
The procedures addressed in this paragraph and in paragraph 5 identified the technical specification LCOs to be satisfied for fueling operations but did
,'
not specify the surveillance procedures to be performed to verify compli-ance. The licensee has prepared a technical-specification-to-surveillance-
!
procedure cross index. With the aid of the surveillance program coordi-l nator, the inspector confirmed that one or more surveillance procedures was
cross-indexed for each of the specifications listed in 50-03.
i A computerized system of tracking the status and next performance date for each surveillance as a function of mode is well along in development.
However, at the exit interview, management stated that a manual tracking
,
l
!
i
!
!
-
---
.
- - - -
. - - -.
- - -
.-
-. -.
.
-
-.
.-
.
_
e
.
system would be used to assure that all required surveillance procedures are current prior to fuel loading.
Manual tracking will continue until confidence is established in the computerized system.
7.
Control of Heavy Loads NUREG-0612. " Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants" defined in section 5.1 certain actions and programs to be undertaken by the licensee.
This inspection addressed the requirements for identification of safe load paths, use of special lifting devices in accordance with ANSI N14.6-1978, and inspection, testing, and maintenance of cranes in accordance with ANSI B30.2-1976, Chapter 2-2.
To determine the licensee's response to these requirements the following General Maintenance Instructions were reviewed:
07-S-14-1, Lif ting Hook Base Measurements, Revision 4 (1/8/82),
07-5-14-13, Periodic Inspection Yale LRP-LRG Series Hoists, Revision 0 (5/22/79),
07-S-14-98, Periodic Inspection and Maintenance of Nesco Cranes, Revision 1 (3/5/81),
07-S-14-99, Frequent Lubrication of Nesco Crane, Revision 1,(1/16/81),
07-S-14-182, Installation and Removal of Drywell Head, Revision 1, 07-5-14-183, Frequent PM Check New Fuel Bridge Crane, Revision 0, 07-5-14-184, Installation and Removal of the Reactor Vessel Head, Revision 0, 07-5-14-185, Periodic Inspection of New Fuel Bridge Crane, Revision 0, 07-5-14-186 Installation and Removal of the Reactor Moisture Separator, Revision 1, 07-5-14-187, Installation and Removal of the Portable Refueling Shield (Cattle Chute), Revision 1, l
l 07-5-14-189, Installation and Removal of the Fuel Pool and Canal Gates, Revision 1, 07-S-14-190, Periodic Inspection Hoists on Fuel Handling Platforms, Revision 0, 07-S-14-226, Spent Fuel Cask Periodic Inspection, Revision 0, 07-S-14-227, Periodic Lubrication Spent Fuel Cask Crane, Revision 0,
,
e
.
07-5-14-228, Frequent PM Checks Spent Fuel Cask Crane, Revision 0, 07-5-14-271, Frequent PM Checks, Containment Polar Crane, Revision 1, 07-5-14-272, Periodic Inspection and Maintenance Containment Polar Crane, Revision 0, 07-S-14-290, Installation and Removal of the RPV Steam Dryer, Revision 0, 07-5-14-293, Installation and Removal of the RPV Top Head Insulation Support Structure, Revision 0, 07-S-15-1, Crane Preoperational Checks, Revision 0, and 07-S-15-2, Frequent Inspection of Cranes, Revision 4 (3/17/82).
.
The following administrative procedures were also reviewed:
07-S-01-09, Qualification / Certification of Overhead Crane Operators,
.
Revision 0(4/10/82),
07-5-01-11, Operation of Containment Polar Crane, Revision 0(3/17/82),
07-S-01-13 Control of Crane Operations, 07-5-01-14, Control and Use of Slings, Revision 7 (11/25/81), and
.
07-5-01-25, Control and Use of Crane and Hoist Rigging, Revision 7 (4/27/82).
Specific details and features of some of the procedures listed above were discussed at length with members of the maintenance engineering department.
Following those discussions two issues remained:
a.
Procedure 07-5-01-13 step 6.2.4 allows a crane to be re-rated following a dynamic load test at 110 percent of the new rating. This is contrary to ANSI B30.2 section 2-2.2.2.
At the exit interview the licensee agreed to either further justify this procedure or to re write it to conform to ANSI B30.2 before re-rating a crane or within six months.
This issue will be tracked as inspector followup item 50-416/82-39-03.
b.
The strong backs for lif ting the drywell and pressure vessel heads, steam d rye r s, and steam separators all are categorized as special lifting devices.
However, the periodic inspection and examination requirements of ANSI N14.6 are not implemented by any procedure. To the contrary, the licensee in its submission of November 3, 1981, took exception to the requirements. The issue of appropriate iiispection of special lif ting devices should be resolved prior to the first refueling
.
.
and will be tracked as inspector followup item 50-416/82-33-04. At the exit interview, the licensee agreed that this was an i.ppropriate schedule.