IR 05000498/1989009
| ML20245A516 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1989 |
| From: | Ray Azua, Bundy H, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245A493 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-89-09, 50-498-89-9, 50-499-89-09, 50-499-89-9, NUDOCS 8904250244 | |
| Download: ML20245A516 (5) | |
Text
, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
,
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-498/89-09 Operating Licenses: NPF-76 50-499/89-09 NPF-78 Dockets:
50-498 50-499 Licensee:
Houston Lighting & Power Company P.O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name: South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2 Ins,wction At:
STP, Matagorda County, Texas Inspection Conducted: March 27-31, 1989 Inspectors:
gAtw[_
f/WN
-
27_
< p 1 pzuattfr Inspector, Test Programs Date /
SrtTTon, Division of Reactor Safety
//
,/ :/
$f &[,
4/it/ty e
H. F. Bundy> Reactor Inspector, Test Programs Date Section,'tivision of Reactor Safety
,
i
,
Approved:
2/ /[
M/5/h'7 W. C. Seidle,' Chief, Test Programs Section Date Division of1eactor Safety Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted March 27-31, 1989 (Report 50-498/89-09)
Areas Inspected:
No inspection of STP, Unit I was conducted.
Inspection Conducted March 27-31, 1989 (Report 50-499/89-09)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of STP, Unit 2, including precriticality data review and startup test results evaluation for initial plant startup.
8904250244 090417
'
PDR ADOCK 05000498
PNU
,
_
- - - - - _
-
.
.
.
.
.
-2-Results: Testing had been performed in accordance with the licensee's procedures to verify compliance with the Technical Specifications (TS),
Section 14 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), and vendor design criteria for the startup program through low power physics tes ting. The test program procedures were well organized and test results packages clearly stated how acceptance criteria were satisfied.
No violations or deviations were identifie <
~,
.
.
!
.
.
.
-3-
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted HL&P
- W. H. Kinsey, Plant Manager
- S. L. Rosen, General Manager, Operations Support
- S. M. Dew, Operations Support Manager.
- J. E. Geiger, General Manager, Nuclear Assurance
- J. W. Loesch, Plant Operations Manager
- D. A. Leazar, Reactor Support Manager
- S. M. Head, Supervising Licensing Engineer
- C, B. Thiele, Reactor Performance Supervisor City of Austin Electric Utility
- J. Neely, Engineer NRC
- J. E. Bess, Senior Resident Inspector, Ur.it 1
- J. I. Tapia, Senior Resident Inspector, Unit 2 The NRC inspectors also interviewed other licensee employees during the inspection.
- Denotes those attending exit interview conducted on March 31, 1969.
2.
Precriticality Data Review (725968)
The purpose of this part of the inspection was to verify that precriticality testing had been canpleted in accordance with approved test procedures and that the related FSAR requirements had been satisfied. The NRC inspectors determined that Procedure 2 PEP 04-ZL-0050, Revision 1, " Test Sequence for Precritical Testing," incorporated the required test requirements and acceptance criteria. The test results were approved by the licensee on March 8, 1989.
It documented completion of Procedures 2 PEP 04-ZG-0008 and 2 PEP 04-ZG-0010 relating to thermal expansion monitoring and vibration monitoring, respectively. The following test results, which were documented in Procedure 2 PEP 04-ZL-0050, were specifically reviewed h' the NRC inspectors:
2 PEP 04-ZG-0002, Revision 0, " Loose Parts Monitoring System Baseline
Data" l
2 PEP 04-ZL-0024, Revision 1, " Rod Drop Time Measurement" I
'
2 PEP-ZL-0025, Revision 2, "CRD Mechanism Timing Test" i
2 PEP-ZL-0057, Revision 0, " Rod Position Indication System Test (Hot)"
l
-__
- _ _
r v
.
.
.
.
.
-4-i 2 PEP 04-ZL-0060, Revision 0, " Rod Control System"
2 PEPO 4-ZL-0061, Revision 0, "Incore Movable Detection System
"
Functional Test (Hot)"
2 PEP 04-ZL-0052, Revision 1 " Pressurizer Spray and Heater Capability" 2 PSP 15-RC-0001, Revision 0, " Reactor Coolant System Leakage Pressure Test" 2 PEP 04-ZL-0062, Revision 8, "RCS Flow Coastdown Measurement"
'
Completion of other tests, which were not specifically reviewed by the NRC I
inspectors, was also documented in Procedure 2 PEPO 4-ZL-0050.
l l
b The test results reviewed by the NRC inspectors were properly reviewed and
approved by the licensee.
Appropriate corrective action documents were initiated for all test deficiencies. The licensee's determination that i
there were no deficiencies, which would preclude proceeding with reactor
!
startup, appeared supportable.
In reviewing Procedure 2 PEP 04-ZG-0002, the
'
NRC inspectors noted that the test engineer reported that there were no unresolved or open items associated with the test results. However, an attached data sheet indicated that Loose Parts Monitoring Channels 3 and 4 were inoperable and that Problem Report 89-0113 had been previously issued. Licensee management responded that, although this was a previously j
known problem, it would be proper to discuss it in the test results.
j Because this test was scheduled to be performed several times during the
'
startup test program, the licensee stated that the operability problem would be discussed in future test results packages.
j The NRC inspectors verified appropriate qualifications for selected test personnel.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
area.
3.
Startup Test Results Evaluation (72301)
The purpose of this part of the inspection was to verify that testing from approach to criticality through low power physics testing had been completed in accordance with approved test procedures and that all related FSAR and vendor design criteria had been satisfied.
The NRC inspectors reviewed WCAP-11922 "The Nuclear Design and Core Physics Characteristics of the South Texas Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant Cycle 1."
Completed Procedure 2 PEP 04-ZX-0001, Revision 1, " Test Sequence for Initial Criticality and Low Power Testing," was reviewed.
It documented completion of all required startup testing through low power physics testing. Test summaries were attached to this procedure and its subtier procedures, which clearly stated test results. The NRC inspectors also reviewed Procedure 2 PEP 04-ZA-0003, Revision 0, " Documentation of
- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
m
__
.
,
.
.
.
.
-5-Initial Startup Test Results."
In addition, the NRC inspectors reviewed the following subtier procedure results:-
2 PEP 04-ZX-0003, Revision 0; " Boron Endpoint Measurement"
2 PEP 04-ZX-0010, Revision 1, " Natural Circulation Verification" 2 PEP 04-ZX-0002, Revision 1, " Initial Criticality"
2 PEPO 4-ZX-0004, Revision 0, " Isothermal Temperature Coefficient
Measurement" 2 PEP 04-ZX-0006, Revision 0, "N-1 Rod Worth Verification"
2 PEP 04-ZX-0007, Revision 0, "RCCA Pseudo Ejection Test" All test exceptions were dispositioned and appropriate corrective action.
documents were initiated. The licensee's determination that there were. no test exceptions, which would preclude proceeding with power ascension, appeared supportable. The NRC inspectors noted that there were relatively few test exceptions.
The NRC inspectors verified appropriate qualifications for selected test personnel.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program area.
4.
Exit Interview The NRC inspectors met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on March 31, 1989, and summarized the scope and findings of this inspection. Proprietary materials provided to the NRC inspectors were returned at the conclusion of the inspection and none of their contents are reproduced in this report.
'
_
- _
_ - _ __-__ _ - __ - -