IR 05000445/1987012

Insp Rept 50-445/87-12 on 870708-0804.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Retesting Program & Plant Tours

ML20237H058
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	08/26/1987
From:	Kelley D, Will Smith, Warnick R NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:
Shared Package
ML20237H042	List: IR 05000445/1987012 ML20237H041
References
50-445-87-12, NUDOCS 8709030100
Download: ML20237H058 (7)

Text

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _

l '

-

l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

NRC Inspection Report: 50-445/87-12 Permit: CPPR-126 Docket: 50-445 Category: A2 Construction Permit Expiration Date:

Unit 1: August 1, 1988 Applicant: TU Electric Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street Lock Box 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES),

Unit 1 Inspection At: Comanche Peak Site, Glen Rose, Texas Inspection Conducted: July 8 through August 4, 1987 Inspectors: T I D. L. Kelley, Senior Resident Reactor /Date Inspector, Operations (paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4)

l l MR Smith, Resident Reactor Inspector r/uf7

' Date j (paragraphs 1, 3 and 4)

l Reviewed by: TP F Ldwrt4A F- a- F7 R. F. Warnick, Assistant Director Date for Inspection Programs Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects l

l 870903C100 870826 PDR ADOCK 05000445 O PDR

-_-_-__- _

- _ _ _ _ - _ .

.

. .

Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted: July 8 through August 4, 1987 (Report 50-445/87-12)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced safety inspection of applicant's Retesting Program and plant tour Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie ;

l l b 1  !

l i

l

,

l i

l l

-

I

.

. .

DETAILS Perdons Contacted

• R. P. Baker, Regulatory Compliance, Manager, TU Electric (TUE)

• J. L. Barker, Engineering Assurance Manager, TUE

• W. G. Counsil, Executive Vice President, TUE .

• R. D. Delano, Licensing Engineer, TUE }

• D. R. Ferguson, CPRT Program Director J

• P. E. Halstead, QC Manager, TUE '

• T. L. Heatherly, Regulatory Compliance Engineer, TUE l

• D. A. Hodge, CPRT Interface, ERC l

• S. Karpyak, DAP Coordinator, TUE l

• J. J. Kelley, Director of Construction, TUE l

l *0. W. Lowe, Engineering Director, TUS l

• R. L. Moller, Westinghouse Site Manager, TUE

• D. E. Noss, QA Issue Coordinator, TUE .

,

• D. M. Reynerson, Construction Director, TUE  !

l

• J. E. Rushwick, Testing RTL, CPRT l

, *C. E. Scott, Startup Manager, TUE l l *A. B. Scott, Nuclear Operations Vice President, TUE l'

l *J. C. Smith, Plant Operations Staff, TUE l *R. G. Spangler, QA Assistant Manager, TUE I *P. B. Stevens, Electrical Engineering Manager, TUE

• J. F. Streeter, QA Director, TUE

• T. G. Tyler, Projects Director, TUE The NRC inspectors also interviewed other applicant employees during this inspection perio * Denotes personnel present at the August 4, 1987, exit intervie . Retesting Program (70301)

The applicant is developing a plan for retesting of some systems due to the length of time since preoperational testing was completed and to support probable design and system configuration changes. The NRC inspector discussed the retest program with applicant's representatives and noted that the program is early in the development stage. The detailed plan and procedures are being written and will be reviewed during subsequent inspection period The program outline is as follows:

. Develop an updated set of acceptance criteria based on:

(1) scope of the previous test program; (2) system functional test requirements; (3) design validation program; and (4) system configuration change .

Expand the acceptance criteria by considering: (1)

Baseline Technical Specification surveillance

____ _

l I

.. ..

1 1 I'

'

requirements; (2) previously deferred tests; (3) licensing commitments; and (4) industry experienc . Verify that all systems important to safety are 3 addresse l l

\

. Sort retest acceptance criteria by system and review for completenes . Develop the retesting requirement . Write and review the retest pla l l

. Write, review and issue detailed administrative retest control procedure (s).

. Write, review and approve individual retest procedures.

l

. Conduct retest . Evaluate the completed retest No violations or deviations were identified.

l Plant Tours (71302)

l

'

The NRC inspectors performed frequent tours of Unit 1 and common plant areas during this inspection period. In addition to the general housekeeping activities and general cleanliness of the facility, specific attention was given to areas where safety-related equipment was installed and where activities were in progress involving safety-related equipment. These areas were inspected to ensure that:

. Work in progress was being accomplished using approved procedure . Special precautions for protection of equipment ~were implemented and additional cleanliness requirements were being adhered to for maintenance and welding activitie . Installed safety-related equipment and components were being protected and maintained to prevent damage or deterioratio While conducting a routine inspection, the NRC inspector noted that the pressurizer spray valve bypass valves, 1-RC-8051 and 1-RC-8052, have a loose-fitting "T-handle" coupling between the valve stems and the remote operators. With this arrangement, the valves cannot be secured in the required throttled position, because the locking device is on the remote handwheel. Because of the loose linkage, workers in the area could inadvertently change the valve position without the knowledge of operating personnel and without unlocking che

- _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ - _ _ _ _

-

. .

remote handwhee During system valve checks, the valves are only verified to be locked. The bypass valves are previously set during preoperational testing to provide a continuous, low flow of reactor coolant to the spray nozzle to prevent thermal !

shock to the nozzle and the pressurizer penetration assembly I as spray flow is initiated. Inadequate flow may result in )

excessive thermal stresses on the pressurizer nozzle assembl :

This deficiency was identified to the applicant about two !

years ago, and the applicant indicated that it would be corrected by a Design Modification (DM). During the exit interview of August 4, 1987, the applicant reaffirmed the intent to accomplish the DM and stated that the DM was currently being processed. Implementation of the DM shall be tracked as open Item 445/8712-0-0 ,

4. Exit Interview (30703[

An exit interview was conducted on August 4, 1987, with the applicant's representatives identified in paragraph 1 of this J '

repor During this interview, the NRC inspectors summarized the scope of the inspectio ,

I l

t l

,

!

l l

I I

l

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

.

• .

~

vRC po0M 786 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N eniNcieAL rNseccioaem issr os .W .mem i "4' 'D . L . K e L L G.y l INSPECTOR'S REPORT ,, u g g Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement R , F", (J M N i c., b N$psCTomt > L . d e L L a y... . _ . . . . . _ _

LO . r= . EdT k '

TA& S4 @N pi g ,y,$ NgxyiggpgC 3ayg LICEN5tt/vtNDOM y gngggggg(,,g,,,C,(,C, ,g NO l8v PAODVCYin3 eval y g g g E N.W t c, ' ~ * * ~

SY $ $ , s tes

~

X O 5 o O 'c 4 4 5 1 g'9 {~'

s i (*g m g g 4 M - M0044

---

--

% - -

Ce nw ,h %L

-

s.e. S , _

o - erart (

g, O rs *I* O }. * - 8t%ACt

_-. L_

Me te a .t* , , g ., 2 14 15 tg ptQiOO O7 tNVt 3 f *0 A flONHN5PtCTQN IfJ$P(C fl0N P( Af 00M(U lf v OttGA>.14A'&4 00 f. Or nLO ce.no CONDUC?

~' ~~

PROM 70 t at0 ION AL O8P'C6 ST A55 OfHin # '# ' # "" *' **"

M0 cay } VA M cay v g 2 . ats:0EN7 tNEPEC70s mg Wooty TTC10N l 9 Marc.w.si v4cN

~

nnAn,pwr.ng Q,7 9 j#

7 y 19 0id Olq gl7 3 . erneoauAnect Aren AisAi n AM f j c c 10 MU Y P S M8M @.Wi@S@ NN " ' * '

' ' 32 ' ' 33 g ga 33 R$G@NAL AChQN TY PE 08 AC MVITY CONDUG1 f d ICI.tet ne.e im edyl (Chen one hos ontvi Y 02 - Settfy

_,,

06 - McMt.V14!t ,,,

to PLANT SE INQJ' AY I

1. NRC FORM S91 03 - INC10$NT 01 - $PtCtAt 11 - WVEN1 H5 'NVC tP10 Af rCN l 2 8 EG'GNAL OfflCE LETTE A 04 - CNFCACEMtNT CC - VtN00m 12. SWiPMENYlit*007 I X~ ~ ' ~

l C$ - MOvt. Avoif 09 - MAT. ACC _3.iuppet

vmgm -

__ 3 aggkggygg$ggscM.nWW,%.:ats W/, e <i- _ _

.N5McTgN"Nv ,iT.O AT.G N F,t.DeNG5

'""**#' TOTAL NUM9(R ENFQactMENY CcNf tatNC6 8 8'081 CQNtatN I.fsu d17kie os k690#61 leavsMrf t AL cat e OF Vict.ATCN6 AND Mtto 'N8 0" Y AI'0h n S C 0 C(viafCNS p.ac s0%.t ut gl>0u t R s N'

k i - Cit An 0 H u t y c"n".s s.,, n M**

2 - voufiGN Ar@s l

l 3 - Of VIA fl0N A 0 A 0 va C C a C A n C o vo oav vn j 4 - ve ufoN 6osviArioN , , ,- , , . vts ,_y,, uo l l j-uay}g~ 7 --] ~j l T.M siE n7 M )f6W hly4MQW , M00ea ,N,0 m.,0N

, , 42, , ,, o M n e .. . .

a 0-, -

(,j$ se ~~ ,

is

_

p MOOVLE NVM0G4 thSP MODULEAIO 'OLLov.vP M00Vd NUMu6*iNo g gr _

Yuiu F aan ens iowna , 9~e ..s r

ao

r ,. rA -

. , -

). g9.. augv E * ,,, e >. e

-

- ... - -

. A - 0 -

jt - 5 , * .

a ( "

,,

@

.

v es -

9 h$ $ks !b k 55  ! $ 8 5 Robiel >

oioa i , i iii , i I,iI^ i i i i , i i i I

ii .i , i IiiI '

i i i i _ _ _

i liiI e

i , , , i liil c i i i i _ i liiI l o

, , , i i liil _

o i n , ,

___ 4- 1iiI l d3 710l3icill ^

Oi /i / Oi / i o 1 l# t Ie i i Iiil '

i i i t __ _

i Iiil

'

liil '

i i , i i i i i i _ _ . _

t Iiil e

i i i , i ii,I c i i ti ___ i liiL o

i i , , , I,,1 o i i i ,

_ i l,,1 3 3 hll3ioal ^

oisil olo i liilo .i i liiI^ i i i i i IiiI i i , i i Iiil '

i i i i i 1.1. i I e

i , i , i li,I c i i i i _ _ _ i liii o

i i i i i liil o , i i i i Iii1 l,iI^ liils liiI^

,; i

.

i i i i i i i l J_1. .L . .

.. l ll 1 !

, , < , i I,iI "

i i t t_.... a I i i I

'

. cma s0U.NC. ,

' ' ' ' ' !l ' ' t- i- L -.. aIiil M '008 WV'ADSN m _ . L _1_ _ _ JL . 3 J n n R ,0 e n n n j 0 [

{ i

,

, , ~ 'j DISTRIBUTION:

qDocketFilesJ(50-j45/446);tNRCjPDR Ldcal~ PDR^

CPPD Reading (HQ)

Site Reading

• CPRT Group

• SRI-OPS

• SRI-CONST

• MIS System

• RSTS Operator-RPB RIV File

! *DWeiss, RM/ALF JKeppler/JAxelrad CIGrimes PFMcKee HSchierling JLyons LChandler, OGC CPPD-LA, OSP

• w/766 l

l

!