IR 05000443/1990081

Insp Rept 50-443/90-81 on 900316-0502.No Violations or Unresolved Items Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Power Ascension Test Program

ML20055F541
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	06/14/1990
From:	Eapen P, James Trapp, Yerokum J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20055F540	List: IR 05000443/1990081 ML20055F539
References
50-443-90-81, NUDOCS 9007180003
Download: ML20055F541 (25)

Text

p q

y- ( y-a i

Q.y' j M.'

,

e

,

,

i

)

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'

,,

REGION I

&

[,

Report No.

50-443/90-81

Docket No.

50-443 q

p License No. NpF 86

g.3,

Licensee:

Public Service Compan_y of New Hampshire u

n 1000 Elm Street P'

Manchester, New Hampshire 03103 p,

Facility: Seabrook Station, Unit 1 L-

,

,

Inspection Conducted: Seabrook, New Hampshire V l

'

Conducted on: March 16 - May 2, 1990

,

Inspectors:

J.' D' Antonio, Operations Engineer R. Barkley, Project Engineer

R. Freudenberger, Resident Inspector A. Lopez, Reactor Engineer W. Oliveira, Reactor Engineer L. Prividy, Sr'. Reactor Engineer C. Vanderniet,'Sr. Resident Inspector

!

bblL Oho

-

J. Yerokun, Reactor Engineer, Special Test Date

.t Programs Section, EB, DRS (%4p

,_(pf N o'

J.

pp, Sr. REattor Engineer (Team Leader),

' Date

,

S tal Test Programs Section, EB, DRS

,

.,

Approved by:

b. k M

"

Dr. P. K. Eapen, Chief, Special Test Programs

'Date Section, Eigineering Branch, DRS Inspection Summary:

Team Inspection of the power ascension test program conducted on March 16 - May 2, 1990 (Report No. 50-443/90-81)

- Areas Inspected: Power Ascension Program review, procedure review, test performance witnessing and test results evaluation.

Inspection Results: No violations or unresolved items were identified, t

9007180003 900702 PDR ADOCK 05000443 Q.

PDC-1,

-

M

'. U... A p,.

M4

'

,'

' "-

'

'

g

,

ti

e.. '

.

-l l: -

.. i i s

!a

,

s

,

as r.

.

a

[ >q?

'

...t.

'

,

m

,

'

'{

g, j

'I

.

.

"h TABLE'0F CONTENTS" N

,

,

.i

,

n

,

6 -

-

.;

.!

,

PAGE

"

J

<

,

,

.

.

'It p

1.0.. Executive Summary;

1

.

2.0

- Introduction

1[

>c o.

.

.

.

b,

. 3 ; 0.- Power Ascension Test Program review 5.

w.

,.

..

.,

P

,14.0 Procedure.-Review-

J;3

.

'

-

.

.

.

.

m s

5.0 Test Witnessing-8

6.0.

Events'that delayed the Power Ascension Test Pr'ogram 9-

-

I

. -

7.0 ; Test:Results Evaluation-

-10.

.

8.0 Nuclear Quality, Group' Power'. Ascension Test Program

11

.;

I-9.0 Concl'usions 12-s

-!

-10.0i ExitLMeeting'

13'

l

'

n

,

.,

..

,

--Attachment A=

1>

-,M.i

'I

,

Attachment.B.

A

'

-.

.

. Attachment-C-ii

>

u;

,

.

m.

3.:

'

.6

-$

.

h',

_

f

+

-

.

j

l}

,

>

. a\\

.- \\

y

'

({

,

lL LN

-

,

,

!

-(

'

<

l.;

.

.

,

.

.

I

,

.

,

-

.]

4.,

\\'

vi

.

,

.

..

.

..

-_

.

..

d

'

.

,

r.

-

• ~

.

,,

i i

.

.g.

o

'. '

.

,

.

DETAILS 1.0 Executive Summary

>

The NRC Special Inspection Team for the Power Ascension Test Program inspection at Seabrook Station was chartered to provide round the clock coverage for test

>

activities while the reactor remained critical and to:

1.

Review and assess the quality of the licensee's Power Ascension Test Procedures.

2.

Witness power ascension tests,

'

3.

Assure that the power ascension test results are in compliance with

'e i

acceptance criteria and licensing requirements.

'

The inspectors completed the review and assessment of the quality of all procedures mandated by the NRC Power Ascension Inspection Program during this inspection. The procedures reviewed were of good quality and were reviewed by the licensee in detail.

No safety significant issues were identified during the NRC review of the power ascension test procedures. NRC inspectors' concerns regarding test procedures were adequately resolved by the licensee.

Test witnessing of five power ascension tests was also conducted. Although the five tests observed were cf low importance to safety, these observations did provide the inspectors an opportunity to observe the program changes made since the low power testing in June 1989 with regard to the startup test program and staff performance.

Test witnessing indicated that changes made to the test program following low power testing have improved test program-performance.

The startup program and

operations staff were observed to be competent and knowledgeable of the power j

ascension test procedures and program requirements.

Improvements made in the areas of training, pre-test briefings, and configuration control were found to have a positive impact on the power ascension test performance.

One deficiency, which occurred in the area of system readiness which resulted in an inadvertent turbine trip, was satisfactorily investigated and corrected by the licensee.

The NRC test results evaluation was completed for one test and partially completed for four additional tests witnessed during this inspection, Due to various problems identified during the power ascension test program, mainly in the non-safety related systems, the program advanced only to about the sixteenth day of the licensee's sixty day power ascension test program. The reactor was at about-eight percent power on April 28, 1990, when the reactor

.

'

was shutdown for a signifi: ant modification of the low pressure section of the turbine.

For the limited testr witnessed, careful compliance with program

.

requirements was observed with good results.

l l

u

!

-.

,, '

.

'V

..,,

.

2.0 Introduction

.

The purpose of the power ascension test inspection is to verify that the

!

licensee is meeting the requirements and conditions for the facility license

!

for power ascension tests.

This verification is to be achieved through reviewing procedures and records, direct observation, witnessing tests, reviewing test data, and eva M ti..9 6est results. This inspection is

-

conducted in accordance with the NRC Inspection Manual (IM) Chapter 2514.

IM2514 divides startup tests in four categories (I-IV) with category I tests being the most safety significant. A list of the licensee's startup test

.'

i procedures selected for the NRC inspection program with their respective

'

categories is provided in Attachment A.

- !

'

NRC Inspection Manual 2514 requires procedure review, test witnessing and test results evaluation for all Category I power ascension tests.

For Category II

procedures, the inspection requirement is to verify the existence of approved

'

,

procedures for all such tests. 'In addition, half of the test results are to

'

be evaluated to determine that these tests are completed with satisfactory results.

For Category III tests, the inspectors are required'to ascertain that approved procedures exists and that evaluations made by the licensee indicate satisfactory test'results. There are no inspection requirements for category IV startup test procedures.

To fulfill the requirements stated above, the NRC assigned inspectors, in addition to the resident inspection staff, to Seabrook Station to monitor power ascension related activities..The Power Ascension Test Program (PATP) inspectors were

.

e

' assigned to provide around-the-clock coverage of test activities seven days a

!

. week as long as the reactor remained critical.

This inspection report contains.

the PATP inspection coverage team's assessment of the startup test program.

For the details of startup related routine station events or incidents see the resident inspector's report and weekly Status Summary reports.

'

.e A Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) 89-11 was issued by the NRC to request I

specific actions from the licensee for the events which occurred during and

following the June 22, 1989 Natural Circulation Test (see NRC inspection

'

report No. 89-82).

In respr' te to' the CAL, the licensee committed to 1.plement-

_.

ing a number of corrective.uions prior to conducting the power ascensior, test

'

_ program. The licensee's corrective action following the June 22, 1989 Natural

.i Circulation Test incorporated a number of changes to the power ascension test program. Changes were made in the areas of equipment readiness, staff training,

'

performance of the pre-test briefing, and improved test procedure quality.

Documentation of NRC review of the above corrective action items is provided in previous NRC inspection report 50-433/89-21.

Effectiveness of the changes

~ 1nstituted by the licensee in response to the above CAL was also assessed, as

'

applicable,'during this inspection.

'

,

,

F

,.%

C c,,

h e,4

.

y %

n-j Y

1. . -

.

P L

3.0 Power Ascension Test Program Review I

.

'

The Power Ascension Test Program organization was reorganized to assign Power p

Ascension Test Program manager's responsibility to the Technical Support Manager, The Power Ascension Test Program Manager has the overall responsibility for the t

conouct of the Power Ascension Test Program.

The~ Power Ascension Test Program t

Manger now reports to the Station Manager and assumes the responsibilities of

'

'

the Startup Manager as delineated in Chapter 14 of the FSAR. Previously, the PATP Manager reported to the Technical Support Manager. Reporting to the Power

Ascension Test Program Manger are the Reactor. Engineering Department Supervisor-and the Program Support Manger.

The inspectors noted that the program is being

'

. implemented more effectively under this reorganization.

Better involvement by

,

senior licensee management was also evident because of this reorganization.

i

-

The Reactor Engineering Department Supervisor is directly responsible for the

'

. conduct of all test activities defined in the Power Ascension Test _ Program as

.well as the supervision of the Shift Test Directors (STD). The Program Support

!

Manager is responsible for test procedure development, conduct of training

activities, event evaluations performed during the power ascension phase, and

'

test package control.

l The Shif t Test Directors' responsibilities include on-shif t coordination of

the power ascension testing activities and the test schedule. The-Snift Test Directors are to assure that all startup tests are conducted in accordance with technical and administrative requirements..The individual Test Directors

report to the Shift Test Director. The Test Directors are responsible for the i

performance of power ascension tests through the Unit Shift Supervisor or the

.

assigned Main Control Board (MCB) operator.

,During the limited testing activities which were conducted during this

)

inspection, the following observations.were made:

>

,

Management involvement in test activities was evident.

• L The Power Ascension Test Program Manager and the Reactor Engineering

Department Supervisor attended pre-test shift briefing and were present in the control room during tests.

Test Program administrative issues such as briefings of all personnel prior-

,

to the shift were addressed-by-startup' management'in a timely manner.

-i Shift Test Directors provided a valuable interface between test personnel-

and control room operators.

Y The STD was located in the control room outside the control area and prevented i

[.

the MCB operators from being distracted by test personnel. He also provided good coordination'of test activities.

The STDs have been cognizant of the integrated plant test program and thus far have been a valuable asset to-the'

'

_ power ascension test program in the areas of program compliance and preparation for plant readiness.

The Test Directors interviewed were cognizant of administra-tive requirements of-the test program, and they conducted testing in accordance with-test procedure in a careful and controllea manner.

.

t

m+

+g

,

'

.

i y

,

..

.i

-

. Administrative requirements for the Power Ascension Test Program are provided in the Seabrook Station Management Manual (SMM) procedure SM 8.1.

Section 4.4

of procedure SM 8.1 provides the training requirements for operations and startup test personnel., The training program requires simulator and/or class-room training for thirteen of the power ascension test procedures.

Six additional test procedures, which have a greater operational complexity, require crew specific training prior to the conduct of the test.

.-The training requirements of operations and test personnel provided in SM 8.1 are consistent with commitment made by the licensee in response to CAL 89-11.

A. review of the training conducted for the operations and startup staff for 5T-48.1 " Turbine Generator Torsional Response Test" was also conducted.

Power Ascension and operations test personnel were adequately trained in accordance with the procedural requirements.

j

. Station system readiness to support Power Ascension Testing is controlled by station procedure EN1820.005, " System Readiness".

The system readiness

procedure is an enhancement made by the licensee-following low power testing.

'

This procedure delineates the responsibilities of personnel in preparation of the system readiness list.

The system readiness list is a method to track all a

outstanding work request which may impact specific startup tests. A

'

designated System Readiness Coordinator has the overall responsibility to

. establish and maintain this list. The System Readiness Cuordinator assures tnat. Power Ascension Test impact is evaluated, by the Technical Support

' Personnel (System-Engineer) and Test Directors, for all open work recuests.

-This System Readiness List was observed to be working effectively, except for the Electa Hydraulic Control System readiness concern that resulted in an inadvertent turbine trip on April 4, 1990, as detailed in NRC inspection report. 50-443/90-10. As a corrective action taken.in response to the above inadvertent turbine trip which occurred during ST-48, " Turbine Generator Startup Test," the system readiness program was enhanced, The procedure was-upgraded from a department procedure to a station wide procedure. Other enhancements included the additiotal review of the work group supervisor for

.in progress-work requests, and Shift Superintendent review and approval of work request evaluations.

These changes had a positive effect in upgrading the level of review for work requests prior to the startup tests.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the change 6 instituted to the-system readiness

-

program subsequent'to the inadvertent turbine trip.

Startup test procedures ST-48, " Turbine Generator Startup Test," and ST-39, " Loss of Offsite Power,"

were chosen to be reviewed. The inspectors found the system readiness program was being conducted in accordance with EN 1820.005 for the two startup test

reviewed.

The system readiness program was found to be adequate and the program was being properly implemented by the licensee.

,

l l

'

O i

,

w

.

&

,r;

,

'

!'

.

_,

4.0 Procedure Review Selected Startup Test Procedures were reviewed by NRC inspectors to ascertain that the tests are designed to. satisfy the test objectives, test procedures contain appropriate acceptance criteria, and the procedures require the documentation of sufficient information to permit adequate evaluation of the

test results.

,

The licensee performed comprehensive reviews of the startup test procedures.

The reviewers included, but were not limited to, the Station Operations Review Committee, Quality Assurance, Yankee Atomic /NHY Engineering, Self Assessment

,

Team (SAT).

Startup Test Procedures designated as requiring simulation on the facility simulator were further reviewed and revised following simulation

'

i conducted with all operators and test personnel.

The performance of the startup test procedures by the intended users in the simulator resulted in

"

significant improvements in the test procedures.

l In addition to the procedure sections described in Regulatory Guide 1.68, I

Appendix C, Seabrook procedure SM 8.1, " Writing the Procedure", Section 4.6, requires that each test procedure include a Power Ascension Test Background

,

Document and a Pretest Briefing Document.

,

The Power Ascension Test Background Document provides a summary discussion, the reasoning or justification for test procedure performance, me.hodology, l

expected plant response, abnormal conditions, operational limits, unexpected response, and determination of 10 CFR 50.59 applicability associated with the

,

each startup test. This document provides a considerable amount of information on the bases for test criteria and methodology..In addition, the expected-plant response section provides operations and test personnel with important

.

information prior to test performance.

The Pretest briefing Document Guidelines were provided to assure that

,

information important to the conduct of the test were discussed by the test

-

director.with operations, and support personnel prior to conducting the test.

>

.The Pretest Briefing Document also provides a list of recommended and required

'

attendees for the pretest briefing.

The Pretest briefing document discusses the test objective, descrites in detailed the method and mechanics of the test

-

conduct, recovery and f' sal cw.ditions, abnormal' condition and unexpected

,

response, and test group communications. This document outlines for the test director information nece sary to perform detailed thorough pretest briefing for operations and station test support personnel.. Both the Pretest Briefing.

'

Document and the Power Ascension Test Background Document are valuable additions to the startup test procedures. The inspectors observed several pretest briefings

'

conducted by the Test Directors.

Pretest briefings were well conducted with l

good participation from all personnel involved with the test, t

The licensees guidelines for writing test procedures provided in Station Manage-ment Manual-SM 8.1, were compared with the guidance provided in Regulatory Guide l

1.68, Appendix C.

The licensees' procedure writing requirements met or exceeded h

those described in the Regulatory Guide. All Startup Test Procedures, designated by the NRC as Category I and II, were reviewed by the NRC inspectors.

.

,

y s

f.-

'

.

L

.-

?

.v q

'

i

o F

F The Startup Test Procedures reviewed were thorough and technically correct.

' Detailed reviews by Quality Assurance, Engineering, Self Assessment Team and i

the Station Operation Review Committee refined and enhanced the procedures.

'

,

The pretest briefing document clarified and reinforced the procedure's intent to the user. The comments generated from the NRC review were resolved

[

effectively in a responsive manner by the licensee.

No unacceptable conditions L

were observed.

5.0 Test Witnessing

-

The Power Ascension Tests were witnessed to ascertain that the licensee was i

m conducting PAT in a safe and controlled manner.

To satisfy this objective the

!

inspectors:

,

Observed the overall test program conduct to ascertain conformance to

'

,

regulatory requirement, procedural and administrative program requirements.

.

Observed and assessed startup and operations staff performance.

+

Ascertained the adequacy of test program records, including preliminary

>

evaluation of test results.

At the beginning of the test coverage, the inspector attended the licensee's

,

test briefing and verified that it was being conducted in accordance with the

'

Power Ascension Test Program (PATP) procedure SM 8,1.

Additionally, throughout the inspection the inspectors attended various test briefings. These briefings

,

were held in accordance with the licensee's program procedure. Planned test-activities were: discussed with emphasis on expected plant responses and test termination criteria if unplanned or unexpected conditions were to occur.

The inspectors observed.that all key personnel such as the Test Director, Operations

.

..

Staff, and 1&C personnel attended these briefings.

Licensee management kept abreast of these briefings and were involved in most of them.

'

On March 20, 1990, reactor criticality was attained. The conduct of the operations shift crew was ooserved to be thorough and professional.

Communica-tion between operators and test directors was concise and generally good.

The plant entered the. first test plateau (5% Reactor Power) of starcup testing. At c

this plateau, several tests were performed which the inspectors witnessed:

ST-13 Operational Alignment of Nuclear Instrumentation ST-23

' Dynamic Automatic Steam Dump Control

.ST-25 Automatic Steam Generator Level Control ST-48 Turbine Generator Startup Test ST-48.1 Turbine Torsional lest ST-52 Therma 1' Expansion The following observations were made:

Testing was being' performed in :seco-dance with approved procedures.

• ~

Shift supervision was aware of ongoing testing and maintained control on

p1 ant status.

~

.I

7,

-

,

y

.

!'

x

,.v

.

.-

m I

i.

Problems encountered were being handled adequately and according to

program procedures.

'

Management was kept informed of ongoing activities.

'a Management was: responsive and involved in solving the issues identified by

{

the test group.'

On March 25, 1990,. the plant completed all tests required by 5% plateau testing.

m L

Between March 25, 1990 and April 28, 1990 when the unit was shutdown to modify the low pressure turbine, the reactor was operated at various power levels.

t below 9% of the rated power. A chronology of major activities witnessed'by the p

inspectors is given in Attachment B.

c, 6.0 Events that delayed the Power Ascension Test Program Several problems identified during Power Ascension Program Testing, many in g

,

c the non-safety' related: systems, caused significant delays in the licensee's Power Ascension Test Program as detailed below:

g 6.1 Startup Feed Pump 011 Cooler Supply Line Leak n

l On March 19, 1990 startup activities were delayed due to a-leak.in the startup feed pump oil cooler supply line.

This line (between discharge of the pump and p

the oil cooler) previously developed a leak due to corrosion. However, the corrective actions were not adequate to preclude the leak from occurring again

on March 19. As detailed in NRC inspection report No. 50-443/90-10, the licensee performed a detailed rooti cause analysis and replaced the line with stainless i

steel piping to preclu* 'eakage due to piping. corrosion during operation. Thi>

problem caused about a u.

'ay in the Power Ascension Program.

6.2.. Main Steam Valve Body tu.,onnet-Leak and MSIV Hydraulic- 011 Leaks

.

On March 20, 1990,- a body to bonnet leak was identified on main steam system-D valve MSV-60 (Isolation valve to the high pressure steam header).

A secondary

side cooldown was required in order to repair this leak.

In addition, a-hydraulic oil leak was identified in-the controller for MSIV-88.

These leaks:

were satisf actorily: repaired and tested on March 22, 1990. This' problem caused.

.another two days of delay in testing activities,

'6.3 The-loss of 24 VOC Backup Power Supply

,

<

.;

On March 21, 1990 power to the control rod panel backup power supply was lost.

'

After placing the unit in Mode 3, the backup power supply was replaced and-satisfactorily tested.

This caused one day delay in the PATP.

j

...

'\\.

,

,

-_

_

_

,

r.

,

.

,

,

,m

.9

L,'

"

'

'

,

6.4 Main Turbine Differential' Expansion problem

'

~0n March 27, 1990, the main turbine was manually tripped when the indicated rotor axial position on the turbine supervisory instrument (TSI) was approaching the

'

n red zone. The licensee reviewed instrument calibration sheets to determine if l

actual rotor position was being indicated.

An inspection of-actual positions

-

L of differential expansion detectors was performed by the licensee in order to i

establish the accuracy and reliability of rotor position indicated by the TSI.

,

.

The licensee discussed the issue with vendor representatives and decided.to place.the turbine on turning gear, perform shell/ chest warming and monitor roto _r

.!

expansion.

This warm-up period lasted for 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> during which the rotor differe.Mial expansion was closely monitored.

On March 30, 1990, the licensee

<

. deter the votor differential: expansion instrumentation to indicate actual.

!

toter : m 1on, power ascension. testing activities then resumed on March 31, 1990.

(

,

f Iowever, this problem caused a four day delay in the PATP.

'

6.5 Turbine Trip Issue of April 4. 1990

\\

On April 3, 1990, the licensee performed troubleshooting and repair work in the-turbine Electro-Hydraulic Controller (EHC) cabinet to correct a large speed

'

error and control circuit noise. On April 4, 1990, the licensee attempted a

'

turbine roll at the conclusion of these troubleshooting efforts. The turbine

tripped automatically, due to a loss of Load Sensor.

Details of this issue are

'

contained in Inspection Reports Nos. 50-443/90-08 and 50-443/90-10. The PATR activities were delayed approximately twelve days for resolution of this 'ssue.

'

'

y 6.6 Turbine Torsional Test During tho' period of April 25, 1990, through April 27, 1990 the licensee performed the' Turbine Torsional Test per ST-48.1'.

The results of this test were analyzed

by General Electric Company (the turbine generator vendor).

This analysis e

concluded.that significant turbine repairs would be required to resolve torsional

'

resonances prior to continuing with ST-48,1.

On April 28, 1990, the plant was

shutdown to perform the required repairs on the low pressure turbine.

At the conclus un of this-inspection, the turbine l repair was scheduled to be-completed i

May 25,.1990, causing an additional delay of approximately four weeks in the

,

PATp.

!

17.0_ Test'Results Evaluation On March 24, 1990 ST-23, Dynamic Automatic Steam Dump Control test was completed.

[

The PA1P group reviewed the test package and then submitted it to the Station's

'

Operations Review Committee ($0RC) for review and approval.

The inspector

,

reviewed the test package and verified, for selected sections, the following:

Test changes wete correctly incorporated into the test procedure

'

' Objectives of the test were not changed by the test changes

Acceptance Criteria were met t

Data sheets were properly completed

.

Required levels of' review had been performed in accordance with SM 8.1

,

.

j.

-

--

-

-

,

,

.

+

.v

,,

e'

li

.

-

.

.The' test adequately demonstrated that the Steam Dump valves are capable of going

.

from full closed to full open or from full open to full closed within.5 seconds.

,,

The test also demonstrated the proper operation of the valves with the Controller

,

E in either the PRES $URE or T avg control mode. On March 25, 1990, the inspector cw

. attended the 50RC meeting where the results of ST-23 were presented for review,

were discussed, and approved.

The inspector observed that the licensee conducted

'

'

i, their operations in accordance with established procedures.

D, 8.0 Nuclear Quality Group _ Power Ascension Test Program

,

The Nuclear Quality Group (NQG) reviews and documents the review of each ST 1'

-procedure by. signing the ST procedures prior to SORC review.

The NQG review-of Startup Test Procedures has been enhanced following the low power testing.

The review of power ascension test procedures by NQG, for the PATP procedures, consisted of a dual review by formerly licensed individuals contracted by the

,

g NQG and by NHY QA eng;neers.

Individuals conducting these reviews participated in the licensee's PATP classroom and simulator training. NQG comments for ST-48, " Turbine Generator Startup Test," provided detailed and technically sound comments to the Startup Test Group.

For the test procedure reviewed, comments provided by NQG were incorporated into the test procedure by the L

Startup Test Group.

The NQG review ed documentation of test procedure com-ments was adequate.

The Nuclear Quality Group (NQG) established a special group to provide round-the clock shift test coverage for the PATP with at least one Nuclear Quality Supervisor on' shift at all times. The NQG PATP Coordinator is responsible for overseeing the three levels of the NQG PATP coverage as detailed below.

The-Quality Control (QC) Surveillance Tetm is responsible for overseeing the quality of the specific test details (e.g., test parameters, witness points)

p The Quality Assurance (QA) Surveillance Team is responsible for overseeing the J

activities of QC and for overseeing the quality of the plant operations (e.g.,

plant response, control room communication, log book updates).

The Audit Team

.is responsible for coordinating routine audits of the NQG and the PATP

'

' including verification of test acceptance criteria and personnel training requirements.

TheQAEngineeringGroupisusedastheTechnicalSupportTeamfortheNQG PATP, This group-_s function is to~ clarify any-technical issues in question.

.

The QA Surveillance Checklist / Report is a deta!bd surveillance plan for each

-

'

ST procedure.

The " Method of Surveillance Sectico" provides the QC inspector with specific items, such as trip criteria and important procedure steps, to be witnessed and documented as being successfully completed on the Surveillance Checklist / Report. The Surveillance Checklist / Report also provides guidance on

-

w

'the: intent of procedure steps and reference documents.

Findings made by QC

'

inspectors are documented on the Surveillance Checklist / Report.

Each shift,

-QC inspectors are required to complete a QA Surveillance Checklist / Report for

,

.

q

!

"

p/

.

• c

.

s t

.

'.v -

,

!,.

l

,-

's

0

!

t ST witnessed by the inspector during the shift.- Several Surveillance n

Checklist / Reports for previously conducted ST procedures were reviewed.

In

,

addition, all QA Surveillance Checklist / Reports which resulted in findings were reviewed. The reports provided detailed observations of test activities

.

.

by the QC inspectors conducting the surveillance. The reports indicated that

!

'the QC inspectors provided comprehensive coverage of PATP activities. The overall use of the QA Surveillance Checklist / Report and the review of

'

-

completed surveillance indicate that the licensee's QA review of PATP

activities is comprehensive and thorough.

'

The inspector also reviewed the NQG Audit Teams audit of the qualification and training of the NQG PATP members and the individuals assigned as Test Director

,

y or Shift Test Director in the PATP. The audit was found to be adequate.

!

+

The inspector interviewed a QC Surveillance Team member and a QA Surveillance

,

Team member.

They were found to be knowledgeable of their respective

!

responsibilities and knowledgeable of the current plant status and overall plant operations.

The NQG PAIP members have daily meetings to review the events of the day, address any concerns, and prepare for upcoming events.

The inspector found the meetings to be-thorough and informative.

,

a 9.0 Conclusions The NRC PATP inspection team concluded that the licensee is implementing the

'

'

PATP in a deliberate and safety conscious manner. The procedures reviewed were

,

of good quality; no safety significant issues were, identified.

NRC inspectors'

concerns regarding test procedures were adequately resolved by the licensee.

-i Test witnessing indicated that the licensee has improved test program performance

[

since the low power testing..The Startup Program and Operations staff were observed to be competent and. knowledgeable of the Power-Ascension Test Procedures

,

and program requirements.

Improvements have been made in the areas of training,

,

pretest briefings, and configuration control.

These showed a positive impact

'

on.the Power Ascension Test Performance.

One deficiency in the area of system

'

readiness resulted in an inadverte-turbine trip. This event was satisfactorily.

investigated and corrected by the licensee (ref. inspection reports 50-443/90-08 and.50-443/90-10).

<

.

.

I

>

-For the tests witnessed, compliance with program and procedure requirements were observed. NRC completed test results evaluation for one test and partially reviewed four additional' tests witnessed, Results were satisf actory and were documented in accordance with the procedure.

,

li s

l 1-

mm~

n x :9".;,;;b'

y',<=:1,i,i,!>

-

-

-

d,.

gs-

.

w.

n x

,

,

Stip

,

,

.

'

,

lh; ; 1,.;:u,3j a.: -e jC f w ;?7

>!.'

w)p pi.... s : p V. e

-

,

q.

.-

. !-

1;.

-

i 9 e-1-<

i*

,

i

.~

s p-c

.

is

%

my +

>

,

,p y -,-

. r. 3 ;-

,

<

,

r

,i..

.:

,

-

_. ;

3.,x.T;W' y fWY

,

,

m

-

.

F

--

i

,

.

.c i

i s

.

,,

.- r

-

7. 0m,...,mq, w. 3, :.

.

,

-

s,..

, - l 13;

.

-

<

.

.

,

,

.

.lf' -

,

i n

s

.

s, l j,

>

..t l}

b;'d L;10e0 Exit'Meetino-a l 'p.

.,.

..

,

l

+

.

.

g-r

.

.3

,3}The inspectors met with the licensee personnel; listed in Atlachment C on a1 In

< 9eekly basis an' d: discussed the findings and conclusions of. this inspection.

.

!

.

,

[At:noitime during thi.s inspection did.the inspectors provide written material-

'

. _a to-the, licensee. The> licensee.did not identify that the inspection involved.

, o i

.any. proprietary information.

'

'

. ;

.

ny-

',..

a

-

,

a

,

,

E~'.,'

,-

f i,.. i;

,

(

'k

,1.

b.,

?

,

n

.)..

I,,

,

't

-)

.i

"

c

,

,

a v

i

+

,

.

],

i ;...

.-

( *j g ;

'

i

' -

if

i

.r i

'

s F

),

e (

p a

<>

,

,

w.

..

a.

.

'

,

yr<,,2

_

p -.

i

.

.

.

l; '

y gb

-;.s.

'

?

'

r

,,

i,-

_

-

I T

i

}

q[

-

?

f'('

.s'

s

,

t

.t t

'

.

,

g.l G '

-Ji ;,

i

>y

[!)/~

k

"{

t

'

,

'

'

%..

.

,'

.p' ii

.

,

y

,.

M

,m

,

f't

'k i

p r

=n

-

,'

,

.. L r

'

-

n i t

+

et a.

t i-i

,.

i n';- '

i

-

,_

"

.

<

,

,

,.

..,

b

>

,

,

.

b1 5~!:

- ~ '.'

)

3.:

)j4

'

.g j

.,

,

i

..

t

,

> ::c 8

.

\\

i; d

'

.f

<

. -.

,

,

.

,

4-Y i

1.

y

,<

N;>

,-

a

,

.5 I

s,

.-e=

l I

j

% <

n.-

,

i-r

!;

':

.

.. ;

?

t l..

,

k

'

l.

!

it i

P

.t.

.

'

')

,

._?

'

,.

<-

a f

y

>

,

,

p7

>

i t,i:t

4

.

.

g.

s

_

_

--

+.

,

."

@

n,:

i-

]

'

m

....

'

,i.,

I L

L i

y

.

,

F Attachment A Categorizing Startup Tests for NRC Inspection h

Category I i!

ST-22 Natural-Circulation Test ST-29 Core Performance Evaluation b'

ST-30 Power Coefficient Measurement Si-33 Shutdown Outside Control Room

ST-38 Unit Trip from 100% Power-ST-39 Loss of Offsite Power L'

Category II

+

e

..

.

~.

F ST-23 Dynamic Automatic Steam Dump Control L

ST-24' Automatic Reactor Control

"'

ST-25 Automatic Steam Generator Level Control ST-34 Load Swing Test-ST-35 Largo-Load Reduction ST-43 Process Computer Category III

,

SST-13.0perationa'l Alignment of Nuclear Instrumentation

'

w

'

ST-14.1 Operational-Alignment'of the Process Temperature Instrument'ation

.ST-15. Reactor Plant System Setpoint Verification ST-26 Thermal Power Measurement and Setpoint Data Collection ST-27-Startup. Adjustment of Reactor Control System ST-28~ Calibration of Steam and Feedwater Flow Instrumentation

.

' ST-36 Axial Flux Dif ference Instrumentation Calibration L

.

'ST-42 Water Chemistry Control-

"

$T-44 Vibration and Loose Parts Monitor

.ST-45 Process Effluent Radiation Monitoring System p

ST-46 Ventilation System Operability Test

,

Category IV

,

ST-37. Steam Generator Moisture Carryover Measurement i

ST-40 NSSS Acceptance Test ST-41 Radiation Survey

ST-48 Turbine Generator Startup Test ST-48,1 Turbine Torsional Test

'ST-49 Circulating Water System Thermal-Hydraulic Test R

ST-51-Power Ascension Dynamic Vibration Test F

ST-52 Thermal Expansion'

-ST-56 Piping. Vibration Testing

.ST-57 Drain Out Approach

!

i

.b

fl., n 7y

'

'

ey -

L

.W p;T : 3-r;,

a

'q;

'. *,

'

,

id

4

. Attachment'B

'

CHRONDLOGr QT~MENTS POWER ASCENSION TESTING

,,

'

March 16 - April 28, 1990

,

[

D_A_T,,_E.

EVENT L

J3-16 - Started NRC Power Ascension' Test Program Test Coverage.

'

- Reactor.-in Hot Standby pending return to service of a non-safety I-4 inverter.

'

-3-18I'- Began.' adjustment of the pressurizer spray bypass valves,

,

3-19. - Startup on hold pending repair to a 3/4" Startup Feed Pump oil cooler-n

. supply line leak.

-.S.tartup Feed Pump repair complete.

3-2b1'- Reactor Critical

. Began sections of ST-52 " Thermal Expansion"

.- Completed. sections of ST-13 " Operational alignment of Nuclear-

>

Instrumentation".

.

,

.

.

O-

+ Testing suspended pending repair.of MSV-60 body to bonnet leak.

- Repairs being made to hydraulic oil leak on MSIV-88.-

'

,

,

3-21; -: Repairs-to MSIV-88 complete.

,

. Ground detected on-Rod Control Cabinet SCDE 24 VDC Power Supply.

'

3-22-l Station enters Mede 3 to repair Rod Control Cabinet Power Supply.

-Station' returns to Mode 2 following RCC repair.

"

J-ST-23 " Dynamic Automatic Steam Dump Control" initiated, y

3-23' - Steam Dump Valve 3020 feiled test,

-

--_. Failure identified as solenoid valve and a controller.Setpoint-

-problem.

- Completed sec' ' is of ST-25 " Automatic Steam Generator Level.

Control".;

y..

'3-24 c-'ST-25 and ST-23 in progress.

'

- Main Feed Pump ~"A" run '

'

3-25 - SORC meeting to approve results of 5% test Plateau.

ST-23 complete

'ST-25 sections 6.1&6.2 complete ST-52 (5% testing)' complete

,

'

ST-1.(5% plateau) completed and 30% plateau entry approved by SORC.

'

Began changing Hi-Flux trip setpoints to 50%.

.; Station ente _rs Mode 1 operation.

- !T-25 in progress.

'

.

4.

I

F"ib 2,

'

'

y.; ' y 9. N.9

"

'

r e

!

l-

-Attachment'B'

-

l

"

!

'

I l

3-26 Preparations in progress for ST-48,1.

-

i p

3-27

- Differential Expansion Problem detected on the Main Turbine.

i

(

p 3-29

- Station enters Mode 2.- Investigation of rotor differential expansic'

b continues.

,

~

-LStation place in Mode 3 while rotor differential expansion t

p

.investiga+. ion continues.

'

n 3-31'

- Turbine differential expansion measurements indicate rotor position

is acceptable as is.

Differential expansion detector will be

"

relocated.

o K

Test schedule' modified to conduct sections of ST-48 prior to ST-48,1.

--

' 4-1

- Station enters Mode 2

?

- Station enters Mode'l-

.

N

- Main Feedwater Pump "B" run per ST-25.

4-2

- Shell and chest warming for ST-48 w

.

- Rolled Main Turbine in accordance with ST-48..

4-3

..

"'

'

Turbine shutdown due to large speed error signal and hi vibration on

,

L

1. 11 bearing.

.

- Trouble shooting resulted in apparent fixes to vibration and EHC n

-

problems, 4-4 Rolled Main Turbine.

-

Turbine Automatically shutdown.

'-

-: Testing!on hold pending root cause analysis-for turbine trip.

l4-9.

-ERepair MSIV hydraulic oil leak.

<

'

- Station enters Mode 2.

4-10 1-Slide Link position verification performed..

4-16;

. Entered Mode 1.

- 4-17 Began _ conducting sections of ST-48

-

- Turbine trip due_ to1345kv. ground in switch yard.

,

g

4-18

.- Rolled Turbine.

- Tripped _ turbine due to Hi-vibration this vibration was expected by the. licensee due to rubbing of the turbine seals. This rolling and

,.

-

U tripping of the turbine occurred a number of times over the next two..-

days.'

4-20

' - ST-48 in progress'

t

.

_4-22.

---Completed section 6.1 of ST-4E and entering mode 2' fee EHC & MSIV

,

work'.

I g

-

t ($

$

_ _ _ _.. _.... _ _. _..

... - -

,.

..;

r

_,. o?.4j

,

i;..

.

- 3-Attachment 8'

'-

o:

.

Ongoing work to. establish ST-48.'1 initial conditions.

4-24

--

I

'4-25 ST-48.1 Commenced.

-

'

4-27 sTurbine tripped per ST-48,1 Torsional Test Data Being Analyzed'.

-

. Station placed in MoJe 3 following indication that turbine repairs 4-28-

-

will be necessary prior to continuing with the torsional test.

y

,m

.

E

{.'.

i

&

ib d

...

,

,

l.

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

yy.

,

-

(:.

__YL.>'

i

7

Q 3.

'

.

- *(

[F

.

.

'

-

Attachment C

,

,

.l I

Persons Present at Weekly Exit Meetings i

I W. A. Diprofio', Assistant Station Manager.

'

'B, L. Drawbridge, Executive' Director of Nuclear Production r

P.-E. Falman, Technical Support >

J.'M; Grillo 0perations. Manager P. V.-Curney,'_ Reactor Engineerin.q. Supervisor J.-W. Hill, Goerations G. Kline, Power Ascension Test Program Manager

'

s

=Gl A. Kann, Program Support Manager R. L' Krohn, NRC-Coordinator M.'E. Kenney, System Support Manager

,;

.

,

s'

,

EW,-A.' Leland, Chemistry / Health Physics

=

D.

E'. Moody,LStation Manager E. Martel, Technical Projects

,

T F. Murphy,. Instrument & Control

'

J. M. Peschel, Regulatory Services Manager

,

J.:Peterson, Assistant Operations Manager

W.,J.' Temple, NRC Coordinator

,

C.JJ.~ Vincent,LQuality Control VL Warnock, Nuclear Quality Manager

>

--

.

I j

- o i

.

/:

.

t i

!

.

..

.

_

,

n%.

,

50-443

?,

i

'

'

y y c 3..

_

_

_

USNRC Resident. Inspector TPublic Cervice Company of:New Hampshire.

ATTNt iMr. Edward A.'. Brown, President.

Post Office Box 1149

.

?L2 l. and. Chief Executive Officer-Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 -

.,

?

Post Office Box.300.

r LSeabrook, New Hampshire _03874

,

w

-

t'

'.

.

l

'

Public Service Company of New Hampshire Mr. T. Harpster

.;

' - ATTN:f Mr. Leon E. Maglathlin, Jr.

Public Service Company of-

!

President and Chief Executive

_ New Hampshire

'

-"'

,0fficer P.O. Box 300

>

PL O. Box 330 Seabrook,- New Hampshire 03874:

-

'

'1000 Elm Street

,

Manchester,~New Hampshire 03105

,

,

L

-

,,

o

,

rir-.-Donald'E. Moody.

Mr. James M. Peschel i

'

,

Public Service Company of New Hampshire Public Service Company of New

>

~ Post = Office Box 300 Hampshire Seabrook, New Hampshire 1 03874 Post Office. Box 300:

Seabrook New Hampshire 03879 i

.

(

'

'

tt

.

MrkTedC.Feigenbaum--

Mr..R. Hallisey,' Director

-

..Public Service Company of New Hampshire Dept. of Public Health

.

Senior'Vice President &. Chief Operating-Commonwealth'of Massachusetts

'

'

10fficer,

..

Radiation Control Program t'

' Post' Office Box 300'.

150~Tremont: Street,=_4th Floor

!Seabrook, New.Pampshire 03874 Bosten, MA, 02111 l

?

1;

,

,

,

I

' Massachusetts Transportation Commonwealth of Massachusetts, SLO

.;

'

.

.

Designee Bui_1 ding-.

.ATTH: 4 Sarah Woodhouse Robert Boulay, Director Legislative. Assistant Civil Defense Agency.and Office of

.,

1 Ten Park Plaza - Suite 3220 Emergency Preparedness

.

Boston,1Nassachusetts 02116 400 Worchester Road Framingham, Massachusetts 01701

!

'

'

l9i

%'

.

.

---

--

--- -- --

--- --

50-443

'

,g7y

.

,

p. '

Lo. i o :

-.

{ ' Thomas Dignan Esq

.

Assistant' Attorney General E. Tupper Kinger, Esq.

J:hn.A.1Ritscher, Esq.

. Ropes and'GrayL

_ Office of-Attorney General

,

" 225 Franklin Street.

.

208-State House Annex

-

tBoston, Massachusetts 02110 Concord New Hampshire' 03301-

.

i I.

i b-

'Jerard A. Croteau, Constable-Dr..Murray Tye, President

-

82 Beach Road..

Sun Valley Association

.P.-.0. Box 5501'

.

209.Sumer Street

,

., Salisbury, Massachusetts. 01950 haverhill, MA -08139-

,

I i

, 'RobertIA.L ackus, Esq.

.

George D. Bisbee, Esq.

B

.

Backus, Heyer and. Solomon Assistant Attorney General

, 116 Lowell Street:

Office ~of the Attorney General-

,P -0.: Box 516 25 Capitol Street-

Manchester, New Hampshire :03106

' Concord,LNew Hampshire 03301

'Phillip'Ah'en,:Esq..

Diano Curran, Esq.

r

' Assistant Attorney-General:

Harmon-and Weiss Office"of the' Attorney General 2001'S. Street, N.W.-

"Stattr House. Station f 6 '

Suite 430

~ Augusta, Maine :04333 Washington, D.C.

20009'

,

s

,

R't.M. Kacich, Manager of Gerald Garfield, Esquire

=-

u Generation Facilities TLicensing, Day, Berry and Howard

T.HUSCO :

City Place ifP.O. Box 270 Hartford, Ct 06103-3499

? Hartford, CT 06141-0270

,

,

-

),.; a 50-443:

.:

,

L* N o lo Stpven.01esky, Esq.'__

.

D.' Pierre G. Cameron, Jr., Esq-

,

i0ffice of the Attorney General-.

General Counsel

,

a

'

One'Asburton Place Public Service Company of.

!P.i0 Box 3301

' New Hampshire-

Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 s,

1

.

I Ms. Diana P. Randall.

State of New Hampshire, St.0

-

?70 Collins Street

-

George Iverson,. Director

.Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874

' State Civil-Defense Agency

'

State Office' Park South

.

107 Pleasant' Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301

.

>

Richard Hampt, Esq.

.

Mr. Alfred V. Sargent

!New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency _

Chairman l

107 Pleasant Street Board of Selectmen

!

- Concord,

New. Hampshire _03874 Town of Salisbury, MA. 01950-f

'

'

'

o a

d Mr. Calvin A. Canney, City Manager

'Sena+or'Gordon J. Humphrey I

'

m

.

iCity Hall- _

ATTN:- Tom Burack-J L1261 Daniel-Street U.S. Senate'

Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 531' Hart Senate _0ffice Building

'WashingtoniD.C. '20510 j

j-

- ;

_y.

!

q

,

<

LBoardiof Selectmen Mr. Owen B. Durgin, Chairman RFD Dalton' Road.

Durham Board of Selectmen a

Brentwood.c.New Hampshire 03833 Town of Durham

Durham, New Hampshire 03824

,

Q;.

l;-}c.,'

50-443

-

o. soase-

<

JMsj1 Suzanne Breiseth John F. Opeka

/ Town of-Hampton Falls'

Executive Vice President

Drinkwater Road-

.

.

-Northeast Utilities Hanpton1 Falls' New' Hampshire 03844 P.O. Box 270

,

Hartford, CT 06141-0270

,,.

.

.

Mr. Guy Chichester, Chairman

1. lhChairman,BoardofSelectmen-Rye Nuclear Intervention. Committee.

syxTown-Halli c/o Rye: Town Hall-1 South Hamptona New Hampshire 03827 10 Centri' ' '1

,

. Rye, Ne lee 03870-

,

u L

-

iMr..LAngie Machiros, Chairman Jane Spector

' Board of Selectmen:

Federal EnergyLRegulatory Comm.-

...ifor,the Town of,Newbu'ry.

825 North Capitol Street, N.E.

Room 8105 25:High Road

.

. Newbury,-Massachusetts 019507 Washington, D.C. -20426

'

,

,

j

>

.Ms. Rosemary.dashman, Chairman Mr. R. Sweeney-

, Board'of Selectmen New Hampshire Yankee _ Division LTownfof Amesbury Public' Service Company of

,

eTown Hall

'

.New Hampshire Amesbury,Liiassachusetts 01913 Suite 610, Three Metro Center Bethesda, Maryland' 20814.

.x

-

,

,

1. $ Honor'ablefPeterJ.Matthews Administrative Judge LMeyor. City.of Newburyport Howard A. Wilber City l Hall Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Newburyport.. Massachusetts 01950 Board

'

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

.

I x.

. s - "*

'

50-443-L # @.y

? 'Adytinistrative? Judge:

AdministbetiveLJudge

.Alah S. Rosenthal': Chairman

.

Thomas S. Moore, Esq.

,

(".:AtomicSafetyandLicensingAppeal1 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal

- Board:

.

Board

'

ll.S; Nuclear: Regulatory Comission -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission

!

. Washington,'D.C.- 20555 Washington, D.C. _20555

-

,

i Administrative Judge Administrative Judge C Emeth A? Luebke

. Jerry Harbour-

-

' Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.: Nuclear Regulatory Comission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission=

} Washington. D.C.

20555

. ashington, D.C.

20555 W

r

t J

.Edwin J. Reis. Esq.

.

H. Joseph Flynn, Esq.-

fOffice of the General Co'inse11..

Assistant General Counsel

-

U65.- Nuclear Regulatory Comission -

Federal' Emergency tianagement Agency:

Washington,.D.C.

20555-

-500 C. Street, S.W.

Washington..D.C.

20472-

'

,

$

VJackiDolan Carol S. Sneider, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General n(Federal.EmergencyManagementAgenc3 442 J; W.lMcCormack-(POCH).

Office ofLthelAti,rney General-

Boston -Massachusetts 02109 One Ashburton P1v:e,L19th Floon Boston, Massachusetts 02108 SPiulMcEachern,Esq.-

Richard A. Haaps, Esq

' Shaines and llcEachern Haaps and McNicholas

'

J25 Maplewood Avenue 35 Pleasant Street

Portsmouth,;New Hampshire 03801 Concord, tiew Hampshire 03301 g

x

y 50-443-

"~

( C ;,J e v 4 q,.7 o

Boprd1of1SelectmenL Allen Lampert

,

Civil Defense Director

'L10 Central ~ Street

-,

.

. Town of Brentwood l Rye;;New Hampshire '03870 20 Franklin Street.

Exeter, New Hampshire 03833

,

'l William Armstrong.

Sandra Gavutis, Chairman.

Civil Defense Director Board of Selectmen LTown of-Exeter<

RFD #1, Box 1154 n10lFrontStreet Kensington,1New Hampshire 03827-a J Exeter,-Hew: Hampshire- 03833-

,

,

.i.

Anne Goodman,, Chairman lDoard.of Selectmen 13-15 Newmarket-Road

,

Durham,;New Hampshire.03824

,

'

c

,

. Stanley W. Knowles, Chairman-Judith H. Mitzner l Board of Selectmen'

Silverglate, Gertner~ Baker,~ Fine,'

,

'P.'O. Box,710-Good, and Mitzner

,

NorthiHampton,1New Hampshire :03862 88-Broad' Street Boston, MassachusettsL 02110'

,

ic,',

!

4:

'Norsan C. Kantner.

Gary W. Holmes, Esq.

Suberintendent of Schools'

Holmes and Ellis

,5cabol(AdrMnistrative Unit No. 21 47 Winnacunnet Road 1Aluani;0 rive Hampton, New Hampshire 03842 H mpton, New Hampshire 03842

.

1 -

^ -

a

'

'

'

rrQN:p 50-443

}

,

(

..v. qW '

-!

,

!

ElJapeyDoughty

'

-Adjudicatory File. -

,

'

Le SeatoastiAnti-Pollution League.

Atomic Sefetl' and Licensing Board (

l 5 Market Street-Penel Docket'

,

._

Portsmouth, Hew Hampshire- 038011 U;S, Nuclear Regulatory Comission.

Washington, DC 20555.

<

,

-

i

.Iy

<

.I

'l i Mr.. Robert Carrigg, Chairman

-;

.

1 Board offSelectmen-

.

- Town; Office

,

,

!

' Atlantic Avenue-.

-

-

']

North.Hampton,'New Hampshire 03870-

>

!

q

?

1

%

'?

^

T

.!

1-c. p

,i

t

!

$g5-(

,p 4

.[

,

,

l

'J; o

.

.,

l-I (L

'

-\\

l>:.;'

{

U r

..t

.$

LI -

'l..

9

_f_

' I l e, -

.

!$

I

)

II

m

-

. -

,

,

<

, i