IR 05000498/1988044
| ML20207B379 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 07/26/1988 |
| From: | Mckernon T, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207B377 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-88-44, 50-499-88-44, NUDOCS 8808020316 | |
| Download: ML20207B379 (5) | |
Text
_
_
-.
--
-.
t
.
'
.
.
!
'
[
.
l I
APPENDIX l
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION
REGION IV
l
!
!
NRC Inspection Report:
50-498/88-44 Operating License: NPF-76
50-499/88-44 Construction Permit: CPPR-129 Dockets:
50-498 50-499 Licensee:
Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P)
P,0, Box 1700
Houston, Texas 77001
!
Facility Name:
South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Inspection Conducted: July 5-8, 1988 f
7/26//d
Inspector:
-
Aw C i
/ 0.lMcferrion, Reactor Inspector, Test Date f
VrograrEs Section, Division of Reactor Safety j
i I
Approved:
_
/w M
f, 0, 5fldTe, Chftf, Test Programs Section Dat'e
!
Olvisich of Reactor Safety l
l
!
!
!
Inspection Sumary
Inspection Conducted July 5-8, 1988 (Report 50-498/88-44; 50-499/88-44)
{
i Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of STP's Units 1 and 2 review l
oT selected open items attd evaluation of test results for control rod testing.
I Results: Within the two areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identTTied, j
HRSSEM Bul$y Q
.__
_
_
_.
__
-
,
,
.
.
i
,
i
DETAll.S
1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
'
'
- M. Wisenburg, Plant Superintendent
- S. M. Head, Supervisor Licensing Engineer
-
M. Carnley, Instrumentation and Control Manager, Unit 1
- M. Polishak, Licensing Engineer
,
D. Parker, Startup Engineer, Unit 2
- S. L. Rosen, General Manager, Operations Support
- J. D. Green. Manager, Inspection and Surveillance
!
- W. S. Blair, Maintenance Manager
- M. A. McBurnett, Manager, Support Licensing
- R. Ferguson, Licensing Engineer l
- S. M. Dew, Operations Support Manager i
'
R. Pate Nuclear Plant Operations Engineer
W. Evans, Licensing Engineer i
l NRC
- J. Bess, Resident Inspector, STP l
- Denotes those personnel attending the exit interview.
T
'
,
!
The NRC inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel.
2.
Followup on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
a
.
'
j (Closed)OpenItem 498/8775-03. NRC Inspection Report 50-498/87-75; 50-499/87-75 identified the licensee's omission of the CVCS system from
j i
the leakage reduction program as required by Technical i
Specification (TS) 6.8.3a.
During the followup inspection, the NRC
,
1.
inspectorreviewedlicenseepositionletterST-HL-AE-2001datedMay(151)
i 1987, which included the CVCS system in the in-service inspection I
>
l program per ASME,Section XI requirements.
Furthermore TS change
!
notice (TSC-44) was submitted via ST-HL-AE-2485 dated January 28, 1988, to I
omit the CVCS system from TS 6.8.3a.
The licensee justified exclusion of I
the CVCS system from the TS 6.8.3a and NUREG-0737 leakage reduction (
)
program requirements by stating that the CVCS system was not needed for f
L'
shutdown in a postaccident condition and the letdown / seal leakoff and
!
}
charging portions of the system were isolated upon a containment isolation
[
signal.
This matter had been discussed with the NRC and TSC-44 approved.
'
This item is considered closed.
l (Closed) Violation 498/8001-08. The violation involved inadequate
!
corrective action in that the licensee had a backlog of overdue station
.
I j
problem reports (SPR). The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's tracking l
system for station problem reports.
Through selective sarpling of SPRs,
!
!
i
_. _.
. - - -
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ -
_~
_
_
_-
_
-.
.
,
.
e
.
.
the NRC inspector verified that management is effectively tracking problem reports and that root causes are adequately addressed and documented. As
of July 1988, the NRC inspector verified that 4 of 246 station problem i
reports were overdue.
This quantity is a marked reduction from January 1988 when 68 of 204 SPRs were overdue for completion. This item is considered closed.
,
(0 pen)Unresolveditem 498/8809-02.
The inspection finding addressed the question of satisfying TS 6.8.3 requirements to establish, implement, and maintain a program to reduce leakage from those portions of systems t
outside the containment that could contain highly radioactive fluids i
during a serious transient or accident.
In review of licensee documents cited above and NUREG-0737, the intent of h' REG-0737 leakage reduction J
program and TS 6.8.3 was to address those systems considered in the plant accident analysis which could act as radioactive materials effluent paths to the environment. Those systems outside the containment which are isolated during transient or accident conditions are excluded from the requirements of TS 6.8.3.
TS 6.8.1 requires that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering activities recomended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2 of February 1978.
Regulatory Guide 1.33, Appendix A, states that written procedures should be developed for control of radioactivity (i.e., limiting materials released to the environment and limiting personnel exposure). As such, leakage control, minimizing personnel exposure, and minimizing boric acid corrosive attack on materials are of significant concerns to the licensee.
In discussion with licensee personnel, a program for monitoring leakages t
in systems containing radioactive fluids outside the containment is being implemented. The tracking of leakages is based upon submittal of maintenance work requests (MWR) for the particular system. leakage is classif The t along with the contamination levels, status of the MWR, and other pertinent
information.
This information was maintained in a computer data base and reytewed weekly.
The individual responsible for maintaining the data base r
was also responsible for performing system walkdown inspections to verify the type of leakage, status, and prioritizing the problem to operations should the leakage become a significant concern. Although the licensee has implemented a program for leakage reduction outside the containment, the licensee has not formalized the program in a specific written
administrative orocedure, which develops guidelines for the program's implementation, designation of responsibilities, trending, interfacing, and coordinating the program with other departments.
In review of the data base, the NRC inspector noted a significant number of MWRs for i
leakages in the CVCS system.
Durin i
mechanical auxiliary building (MAB)g a walkdown inspection of the area, the NRC inspector further j
verified that numerous MWR tags were hung on the CVCS system.
The
!
licensee's development of a formalized leakage reduction program and
'
procedure shall remain an open item pending future review for adequacy.
(498/8844-01)
t
>
l
- -
-
-
_ _ _
_ - -
.
.
.
.
.
.
<
.
(Closed)OpenItem 498/8809-03.
This osen item involved the licensee's j
control of instrument valves.
During tie follewup inspection, the NRC
'
inspector discussed the instrument valve labeling program with the I
instrtmentation and control maintenance manager.
Through review of I
MWRs XC-87021200, XM-87023426, and XT-88006006, the NRC inspector verified
,
j that the licensee has completed labeling instrument valves inside the
,
reactor containment building and is currently labeling instrument valves
,
inside the mechanical / electrical auxiliary building (MEAB), class I vital
compartments (IVC), and the turbine generator building.
The NRC inspector verified the above during a selected systems walkdown of the MEAB.
This
'
.
'
item is considered closed.
(Closed)OpenItem 499/8816-02.
This portion of the inspection involved a
review of RCS cold hydrotest results to verify that the stated objectives
,
!
and acceptance criteria were met.
The NRC inspector also verified the l
.
test was adequately reviewed by the appropriate manager.
The test i
!
"as-conducted" satisfied the stated objectives and test data was within
!
the acceptance criteria of the procedures.
The Itcensee's administrative i
<
practices in the execution of the test, data evaluation, and resolving
!
problems occurring during the test were adequate.
This item is considered l
)
ciosed, l
3.
Control Rod System Tests (IP70532)
i During this portion of the inspection, the NRC inspector reviewed test results from the following procedures for Unit 2:
.
2RS-A-01, Revision 0, "CRDM Power Supply (Motor Driven Generator
'
'
Sets)"
.
!
2RS-P-03, Revision 0, "Reactor Trip Switchgear"
d r
j The NRC inspector verified that stated test objectives and acceptance
!
criteria were satisfied.
Deviations found during the test performance
j were properly and effectivaly resolved, i
l Within the scope of the inspection, r:0 violations or deviatiors were identified.
j
!
Exit Interview
!
l
An exit interview was conducted with HL&P personnel on July 8,1988, at i
I i
the conclusion of the onsite inspection, during which the inspection findings were summarized. The licensee did not identify as proprietary
j any of the naterials provided to, or reviewed by, the NRC inspector during i
the inspection.
i, (
I
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
...
'
.
i
,
Documerit Narnet
-
EB103 f
Requestor's ID:
l
.
OP20
'
Author's Name:
JGagliardo/cjg
i
,
Occument Coments:
i Comendation
-
,
I i
,
+
i f
i
!
.,
j b
-
.
I h
i
,
r t
\\
I I
I I
!
I
\\
'
i i
!
!
I i
,
l
>
h
,
l I
i l
-
!
.
!
i i
'
>
a l
l
l
'
l
,
i i
-
-
-
-
-
-
.