IR 05000423/1986011

Insp Rept 50-423/86-11 on 860315-0403.No Violation Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Startup Program Review,Power Ascension Test Witnessing & Test Result Review & Preoperational Test Program Final Review

ML20197A714
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	05/06/1986
From:	Eselgroth P, Nicholas H, Wen P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20197A702	List: IR 05000423/1986011 ML20197A698
References
50-423-86-11, NUDOCS 8605120372
Download: ML20197A714 (9)

Text

{

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR hEGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /86-11 Docket No.-50-423 License No. NPF-49 Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. 8cx 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Inspection At: Waterford, Connecticut Inspection Conducted: March 15 ' April 3, 1986 Inspectors: hd C. (dA Peter Wen, Reactor Engineer b~ !Cb date P d C,ldtw b H. 'N1_cholas< Engineertng Consultant N'2MSb date Approved by: Nl S Peter EseTgroth, Ch16f, Test Program

!b date Section, OB,' DRS Inspe.ction Summary: Inspection on March 15 - April 3, 1986 (Inspection Report Number 50-423/86-11

,

Areas Inspected: Startup program review, power ascension test witnessing and l' test result review, preoperational test program final revie Results: No violations were identified.

!

,

,

8605120372 860506 PDR O ADOCK 05000423 PDR

.

DETAILS

- 1.0 Persons Contacted

• J. Crockett, MP-3 Unit Superintendent N. Hulme, Startup Test Engineer

• T.-Lyons, Startup Test Engineer W. Richter, Assistant Startup Supervisor C. Wooten, Startup. Test Engineer D. McDaniel, Reactor Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• F. Casella, Resident Inspector J. T. Shediosky, Senior Resident Inspector

• Denotes those present at the exit meeting on April 3, 1986.

2.0 Power Ascension Tests 2.1 Startup Test Program During this inspection period (March 15 - April 3,1986), the licen-see completed various tests at 50% and 75% power testing plateau Three transient tests were performed at end of 75% power platea These tests included 50% load rejection, main steam isolation valve (MSIV) closure, and loss of offsite power. Except for these tests, most testing-involved data taking during steady-state conditions and/or verifying system response during slightly perturbed condi-tion The power ascension tests were conducted according to the test pro-cedure 3-INT-8000, Power-Ascension Test, Revision 0. This test procedure outlined the steps in the testing sequence, specified calibration or surveillance procedures at appropriate points, and referenced detailed test procedures and data collections in appen-dices. On March 31, 1986 after completing the MSIV closure test and

.

the loss of offsite power test, the licensee cooled the plant down to i

cold shutdown condition for steam generator flushing, containment air j lock door repair and other plant maintenanc .2 .Startup Test Witnessing

The inspector witnessed portions of the tests described below. The tests were reviewed against the attributes identified in inspection

'

report 50-423/86-07 section 5.2.

.

'

2.2.1 RCS Flow Measurement (Appendix 8015)

y The licensee is required by TS4.2.3.1.3 to measure RCS flow using the RCS flow elbow taps once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The purpose

_

.

. 3 of this appendix 8015 test was to provide a calibration data base for RCS flow elbow tap reading All indicated flows from elbow tap with exception of F 445 were found conservative with respect to the result from precision heat balance flow measurement. Flow transmitter F 445 was sub-sequently declared inoperable and the channel bistable trippe All 12 flow transmitters will be calibrated based on this Appendix 8015 test results during the current steam generator flushing outage. Further verification on flow transmitter reading will be performed at the 90% power leve The inspector noted that the instrumentation used for determi-nation of precision heat balance flow, such as steam pressu.re, feedwater temperature, feedwater pressure, feedwater flow was calibrated within 7 days prior to performing this test. This was consistent with T.S.4.2.3.1.5 surveillance requirement The inspector performed independent calculation based on the calorimetric measurement data. The result along with licensee calculated result are compared below:

Loop 1 Loop 2 Loop 3 Loop 4 Total TS Limit (9pm) (gpm) (gpm) (gpm) (gpm) (gpm)

licensee calc. 101,472 104,980 102,623 98,830 407,905 >387,500 inspector calc.101,800 105,300 102,900 99,100 409,100 -

The test result met test acceptance criteri .2.2 MSIV Closure Test (Appendix 8037)

The test was performed at 20% power level by simultaneously

, closing all 4 MSIVs (CTV 27A, 8, C, D). Apparently, with the i alleviation from reactor rod automatic control, the atmospheric

, steam dump valves were able to dissipate the suddenly inter-i rupted steam flow due to MSIVs closure and sustain the tran-

!

'

sien Both the primary and secondary plant systems responded well with no pressurizer safety valves or main steam safety i valves lifting. The plant was brought to stable hot standby conditions following the tes Preliminary test results indi-cated that the MSIV closure times ranged from 2.76 seconds to 3.28 seconds which were within the test acceptance criteria of five second .2,3 Loss of Power Test (Appendix 8030)

On March 31, 1986 with the reactor at approximately 20% power, the licensee performed a loss of power (LOP) test. The inspec-tor observed the test director briefing the operating personnel

e ,

.

. 4 prior to the conduct of the tes In addition, a thorough test procedure review, which included upper plant management, was held prior to the test briefing. The inspector observed control room activities and verified that the required prerequisites had been complete The' test was initiated by manually tripping the reactor and im-mediately followed by manually tripping the 6.9 KV normal service breakers and the 4.16 KV reserve station service breakers. The emergency diesel generators, loading sequency, and plant systems responded well. Following the LOP initiation, power to the re-actor coolant pumps was lost and the plant went into natural circulation during the two hour testing period. Proper perform-ance of the Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump (TDAFP) and battery operation were also verifie During the test, steam generator 'A' atmospheric dump valve lifted prematurely which caused a serious drop in steam gene-rator pressure. The operation crew responded well by closing the isolation valve, recovering the steam generator pressure, and maintaining satisfactory natural circulation performanc Preliminarily, this test demonstrated.that the plant responded as designed following a plant trip with no offsite powe However, many equipment problems were also identified during the test. The licensee is currently evaluating these problem The inspector will follow up these item .3 Startup Test Results Evaluation The inspector reviewed the test results listed below for the attri-buted identified in inspection report 50-423/86-07 section .3.1 10% Load Swing Tests (Appendix 8022)

10% load swing tests. at 50% and 75% pcwer plateaus were con-ducted on March 23 and March 29, 1986, respectively. Prelimi-nary test results indicated that plant systems responded to this transient well with no variables (i.e. Tavg, steam pressure, pressurizer pressure, feedwater flow, steam flow, etc.) incur-ring sustained or diverging oscillations. The times to reach equilibrium following load change varied from 4 to 7 minute This test will be tested again at the 100% power leve During the 10% load decreasing test from 75% power to 65% power, the steam generator ' A' atmospheric dump valve opened prema-

.

turely. Deficiency No. UNS 7568 was written against this problem. This valve was also lifted during LOP test on March 31, 1986. During the current outage (since March 31,1986),I&C personnel performed a set point check on this valve and found that it had drifted low. The problem has since been correcte .

< .

. 5 i

The inspector had no further questions.

2.3.2 Large Load Reduction Test (Appendix 8026)

The-large load reduction test was performed at the 75% power level on March 30, 1986. The transient was initiated by rapidly adjusting the load limiter handwheel to a pre-determinated lower i

set position. During the first 25 seconds, the generator

'

output was reduced from 860 MWe to 300_MWe. The plant auto-

-

matic systems corrected various error signals during the tran-sient and reached a steady-state 24% reactor power approximately 13 minutes after the transien Test results indicated that the plant systems responded well.

! The steam dump actuation, automatic rod control and brief lift-ing of pressurizer relief valves (about 4 seconds), were able to sustain a 50% large load reduction from 75% power level. The pressurizer safety valves and the steam generator safety valves i did not. lift during the transient.

3 .3.3 Automatic Steam Generator Level Control (Appendix 8018)

!

Since plant startup, the automatic steam generator level control i has been tested at various power levels. The steam generator

level control test at 50% and 75% power plateaus were performed

-

in conjunction with the 10% load swing test. (Section 2.3.1).

The test results continuously showed that the steam generator

,

level control responses were stable at these power level ,

However, in the process of initial power ascension from 50% ,

'

power to 75% power, steam generator level oscillations were experienced from the 54% to 65% power level. A similar oscil-lation, but with smaller amplitude, was also experienced during power ascension to 75% power on March 30, 1986 as the unit recovered from the large load reduction test. This problem was discussed at the exit meeting. The licensee planned to conti-

'

nuously evaluate this problem at 90% power and 100% power test plateaus. The inspector will followup the licensee action on this proble .0 Part 21 Report and IE Information Notice Followup

,

I The inspector reviewed the below noted 10 CFR 21 and IE Information Notice pertaining to startup test program. Subsequently, the inspector verified

. the licensee corrective actions were adequate to resolve the deficiency consistent with vendor recommendations or information being properly I

evaluated.

j

! . _ _ _ . _ . . - - . . _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _

. . _ . . ~ . .- .

.

. 6 3.1 Charging Pump Speed Increaser Gear Drive Reference Portland General Electric Company letter to NRC, dated

'

<

! November 4,1985, subject: Trojan Nuclear Plant 10 CFR 21 Defect 4 Report 85-01, Speed Increaser Gear Driv In the reference plant, during maintenance inspection of the speed

,

' increaser gear drive on one of the centrifugal charging pumps, it was found that the keyway on the low-speed shaft that drives the speed

increaser lube oil pump had been machined approximately 2-1/2 inches in length. This allowed the shaft coupling key, approximately one 1 inch in length, to move down the keyway and become almost totally i

disengaged. Upon disengagement of the key, the lube oil pump could fail to operate and the speed increaser fail due to lack of proper lubrication. The affected speed increaser gear drive unit, located between the charging pump and drive motor, is built by Nuttall Gear Corporation, Model SU-1023-8X and SU-16-1 The licensee, Millstone Unit 3, has three reactor coolant charging pumps which have the same subject model gear drive units installe , The licensee evaluated this problem through the Potential Significant Safety Hazard system and concluded that a similar deficiency does not exist at the Millstone Unite 3 site. The inspector had no further question .2 Temporary Strainers Left Installed in Pump Suction Piping i

Reference '

t IE Information Notice No. 85-9 The licensee startup test group tracked temporary strainers using a

'

" Temporary Strainer Log" system. Removal of all suction strainer in the safety-related pump suction piping has been completed. Through

, discussions with the licensee cognizant startup engineer and review

! of " Temporary Strainer Log", the inspector determined that the licen-see has a positive control on this subject. The inspector had no

'

further question .0 Preoperational Test Inspection Program

,

Scope l

The inspector made a final review and verification of the completeness of

'

the preoperational test inspection program for Millstone Unit 3 as to the test results evaluation of the remaining completed tests, and to the review of test exceptions and their resolution, i

i

._. , . . . _ _ , . _ . . . . , . _ . . . . _ _ _ , , - - , , _ . _ , . ~ ,, , , . . , , . . . . . , _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ , . . . . . _ _ . . _ , , , _ . _ . , _ . .,

.- . _- -. . . - - _

. 7

.

Discussion

'

The inspector reviewed the remaining completed tests of the preoperational test program for test results review evaluation and approval by the licensee; and the test exceptions of completed tests for their resolution

, -and closing. The test exceptions completed tests listed in ATTACHMENT A have been reviewed and verified to be resolved and closed by the inspector.

, The test exceptions listed in ATTACHMENT B have been reviewed and are still open. These open test exceptions are transferred to the Startup

, Test Inspection Program and will be followed for resolution and closure.

,

Findings No discrepancies or violations were noted in the review of the completed tests and test exceptions. The test exceptions that remain open will be reviewed and verified resolved and closed during the startup test inspec-tion program. The Preoperation Test Inspection Program is closed.

_ 5.0 QA/QC Interface

The following QA surveillance reports were reviewed to determine the

adequacy of'QA involvement with the Startup Test Program

'

Surveillance Report Title 586-034 3-INT-8000, APPENDIX 8022

.i 586-035 3-INT-8000, APPENDIX 8037  !

'

586-036 3-INT-8000, APPENDIX 8030

.

r The surveillance appeared to be thorough and adequat During this inspec-

tion period, the inspectors noted that QC inspectors were actively follow-

) ing startup program test No unacceptable conditions were identified.

j 6.0 Independent Calculations

,

The inspector performed independent calculation to verify the measured RCS j flow meeting TS requirements. This verification is described in section 2.2.1.

i 7.0. Exit Meeting

.

An exit meeting was held on April 3, 1986 to discuss the inspection scope l and findings, as detailed in this report (see paragraph 1.0 for attendees).

At no time was written material given to the licensee. The inspector de-

, termined that no proprietary information was utilized during this inspec-

tio ,

i

<

-._,.,..7,. , . . . . . - - - . . , , . . - , _ . --

,,v. - - . - _ . - , - - , - . - - - . - - . , . , , = . . . . . . . - - ~ , . . . , . - . - . . . ~ , _ _ - , - - , . . _ , , _ _ . _ . _ . , , ~ . - - , , - , - , - , , _ - - , , . - , , , - . - . , . , - .

-

.

. 8 ATTACHMENT "A" PREOPERATIONAL TEST INSPECTION PROGRAM TEST EXCEPTIONS CLOSED The following test exceptions have been verified to be resolved and CLOSED:

3-INT-2001 Series 3-INT-2003 3-INT-2004 3-INT-2006 3-INT-2007 3-INT-3000 Series T 3307-BP002 T 3309-P001 T 3312-CP T 3313-FP T 3314-HP T 3314-IP T 3315-BA T 3315-EA T 3318-A T 3320-P T 3323-AA00 T 3323-BA002 T 3323-DA T 3329-A T 3341-BP T 3347-BA001 T 3347-BA002 T 3347-CA T 3339-AA

'

T 3410-BP T 3308-P001 T 3314-AP T 3304-AP001 T 3304-CP T 3326-P T 3341-AP T 3344-BP031 T 3344-BA050 T 3346-AP001 T 3346-AP002 T 3346-AP003

.

_ .-.---- - - , , - . _ - , m,__- , __-, ,_-.__ __-- - .---

.

. 9 ATTACHMENT "B" PREOPERATIONAL TEST INSPECTION PR0usAM TEST EXCEPTIONS OPEN The following test exceptions have been reviewed and are OPEN:

3-INT-3000 Series T 3311-BA T 3311-CP T 3313-AP T 3314-GP T 3324-CA T 3325-AA T 3325-CA T 3331-BA T 3331-DA T 3335-CP T 3337-P T 3338-P T 3341-CP T 3720-BP T 3308-P002 T 3311-AP T 3313-EP T 3314-DP T 3314-FP T 3322-P T 3306-P T 3313-FP T 3315-BA T 3316-AP001 T 3316-CP T 3321-AP T 3327-A T 3330-CP T 3330-DP T 3330-EP T 3340-BA001 T 3340-CA