IR 05000458/1989021

Insp Rept 50-458/89-21 on 890424-28.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Surveillance Test Observation & Followup on Operating Events

ML20246P985
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	05/10/1989
From:	Bundy H, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20246P983	List: IR 05000458/1989021 ML20246P975
References
50-458-89-21, NUDOCS 8905220326
Download: ML20246P985 (5)

Text

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

s

,

.

); * .

,

.

APPENDIX

,

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-458/89-21 Operating License: HPF-47 Docket: 50-458 i Licensee: Gulf States Utilities (GSU)

P.O. Box 220 St. Francisville, LA 70775 Facility Name: River Bend Station

<

Inspection At: River Bend Station (RBS), St, Francisville, LA'

Inspection Conducted: ~ April 24-28,1989 Inspector: Y H. F. Bundy, Reactof Inspector, Test Progrdms 5-//o//7 Date Section, Division of Reactor Safety Approved: ,-

W. C. Seidle/, Chief, Test Programs Section

1. [v/tr Date Division of Reactor Safety Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted April 24-28, 1989 (Report 50-458/89-21)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection including surveillance test observation and followup on operating event Results: The surveillance tests observed were competently performed in accordance'with the test procedures and administrative controls. Test exceptions were appropriately dispositioned, and retesting was performed in accordance with administrative requirements. The operating event reviewed by the NRC inspector appeared to have been appropriately dispositione %[2gy,$ h g8 G

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

_ __,

... .s ? .

'

'

-2-

!

DETAILS Persons Coptacted GSU

• J C. Deddens, Senior Vice President, RBNG

• T. F. Plunkett, Plant Manager

• L. A. England, Director Licensing

• J. E. Booker, Manager - RBS Oversight-

• T. C. Crouse, Managtr - Quality Assurance

• P. E. Freehill, Outage Manager

• K. E. Suhrke, Manager - Project Management

• M. F. Sankovich, Manager - Engineering Department

• H. J. Hollkamp, Supervisor - Operational Scheduling

• A. Bysfield, Control Systems Supervisor - Field Engineering

• D. N. Lorfing, Senior Licensing Engineer - Licensing

. S. Feltner Engineer - Nuclear Licensing R. Womack, Systems Engineer - Field Engineering W. Walling, Inservice Testing Coordinator - Field Engineering 0_ther

• D. E. Hill, Lead Control Engineer, SWEC

• L. Curran, Site Representative, Cajun Electric Cooperative NRC E. J. Ford, Senior Resident Inspector

• B. Jones, Resident Inspector The NRC inspector also interviewed other licensee employees during the inspectio * Denotes those attending the exit interview on April 28, 198 . Surveillance Test Observation (61701)

The purpose of this part of the inspection, was to ascertat. that functional testing of the selected equipment and systems wa> performed in

'

accordance with regulatory requirements, applicable industry standards, and licensee's procedures. The NRC inspector selected the following procedures for review and witnessing of related test activities:

' Surveillance Test Procedure (STP)-309-0603, Revision 8. " Division III 18 Month Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Test"

• STP-201-3601, Revision 5, " Standby Liquid Control (SLC) Injection Test"

---

a

- _ -. - - - _

,

.

. ., .

.

-3-f The NRC inspector found that both STPs were responsive to Technical  ;

Specification (TS) requirements and clearly identified acceptance criteri For STP-309-0603, the NRC inspector attended the pretest briefing. The test director effectively covered test objectives, individual te:;t personnel assignments, and precautions and limitation All participants appeared to understand their responsibilities clearl The NRC inspector witnessed the high pressure core spray (HPCS) loss of power (LOP)/ loss cf coolant accident (LOCA) initiation sequence simulation and subsequent system restoration. This portion of the test progressed smoothly, and few test deficiencies were identified. All acceptance criteria were. satisfie The NRC resident inspector witnessed the LOP without LOCA portion of STP-309-0603 and advised the NRC regional inspector that this portion of the test also proceeded smoothly. However, when the data was reduced, it was discovered that the emergency diesel generator (EDG) output breaker did not close at less. than or equal to 10 seconds from the EDG auto start signal as required by TS. .It actually took 10.1 second Prior to the retest, the licensee readjusted the EDG control circuits. The major adjustment made was decreasing the time for flashing the generator field from 5 to 4.5 seconds after the EDG achieved 150 rpm.- l The NRC inspector observed the retest time to be 9.7 second During further investigation of the above failure, the NRC inspector discovered the following facts:

The time for closure of the EDG output breaker following the auto start signal has typically been 9.9 to 10 seconds. The minimum design time is 9 second * The HPCS pump typically achieves rated flow during surveillance tests-in approximately 12 seconds. The value assumed in the safety analysis is 26 second * A similar plant has a TS value of 13 seconds for the EDG auto start tim * The licensee is considering requesting a relaxation of the TS value of 10 seconds for EDG auto start because of the difficulty of meeting ,

this requirement and the possibility of imposing additional starts on l the EDG if it is not me Based on the limited information available to the NRC inspector, the licensee's pursuit of relaxation of the EDG starting time requirement appears appropriat _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _

--

e

. . },

.

.

-4-in performing prerequisites for STP-201-3601, the chemistry department

1 vised the test director that there was approximately 450 ppb sodium pentaborate in liquid contained in the SLC piping. The requirement was no. detectable sodium pentaborate. The licensee submitted a. procedure change allowing it to inject this liquid into the reactnr coolant system (RCS) based on the theory that when mixed with the RCS coolant, the sodium pentaborate would not be detectable. The shift supervisor refused to approve this change based on the following:

It was possible to remove the sodium pentaborate from SLC piping by *

flushin *

No basis was given for changing the requirement from no measurable .

!

sodium pentaborate to a calculable amoun Given the information available this. appeared to be a prudent decisio Secause of the delay caused by this problem, the NRC inspector did not witness the actual SLC injectio No violations or deviations wre identified in the review of this program are . Followup on Operating Events (93702)

The NRC inspector reviewed RBS Condition Report (CR) 89-0207 involving failure to perform an as-found local leak rate test (LLRT) prior to unbolting the blind flange on the fuel transfer tube. The data from the LLRT test is used to correct the results of the containment integrated leak rate test (CILRT), which was to be performed at a later date. The CR (.' ' disposition was to reinstall the blind flange with the same gaskets and perform STP-057-3801 to obtain the as-found LLRT data. Also, Memorandum DFE-240-89 was issued to outage management. .It stressed the I necessity of testing all components subject to LLRTs in the as-found conditio After reviewing the results of-STP-057-3801 and interviewing the dispositioning engineer, the NRC inspector concluded that the disposition-for CR 89-0207 was appropriate. However, it appeared that more information should have been given in the basis for the disposition. For

'

example, it was not mentioned that previous test results always indicated D zero leakage for this component. Also, the flange installation procedure I required the bolts to be torqued to the same values each time it wa installe No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program are _ . _ -

.

'

J ,. ,.

-5- Exit Interview The NRC inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on April 28, 1989, and summarized the scope and findings of this inspection. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to, or reviewed by, the NRC inspector during this-inspectio >

'

l