IR 05000498/1989018
| ML20247H479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1989 |
| From: | Barnes I, Stewart R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247H476 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-89-18-01, 50-498-89-18-1, 50-499-89-18, NUDOCS 8907310038 | |
| Download: ML20247H479 (5) | |
Text
.
..
.
- _ _ _ _.
_
-
-
.
.,
.
APPENDIX
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
l
'
NRC Inspection Report: 50-498/89-18 Operating Licenses: hPF-76 50-499/89-18 NPF-80 Dockets: 50-498 50-499
. Licensee:
Houston Lighting & Power Companyy (HL&P)
P.O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name: South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: STP, Mategorda County, Texas Inspection Conducted: June 26-30 and July 10-14, 1989 Inspector:
8as:/
7-N f7 gfk R. C. Stewart, Keactor Inspector Materials Date and Quality Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety Approved:
I Nce- --w t - 24A*/
1. Barnes, Chief, Materials ano Quality Date Programs Section Division of Reactor Safety Inspection Sumary Inspection Conducted June 26-30 and July 10-14, 1989 (Report 50-498/89-18))
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection 01 the Unit 1 inservice testing (IST) program for pumps and valves, including the witnessing of pump tests and review of previous test data.
Results:
In general, the licensee's test procedures were well detailed in addressing ASME Section XI Code requirements, reference values, and acceptance criteria. Operations personnel demonstrated alertness to procedural detail and knowledge of system performance requirements. No violations or ceviations were identified.
f[kbo
[
'
Q
- - -__ - - - _ _ _ - _ _ __ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
-
.
Inspection Conducted June 26-30 and July 10-14, 1969 (Report E0-499/69-18)
Areas inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the Unit 2 IST program for pumps and vahes, including the witnessing of pump tests and review of previous test data.
In addition, the inspector observed a local leak rate tes.t conducted on containment penetration M-42.
Results: As observed in the area of IST program activities for Unit 1, test procedures were well detailed in addressing ASME Section XI Code requirements, reference values, and acceptance criteria. Operations personnel demonstrated alertness to procedural details and knowledge of system perfctmance requirements. No violations or deviations were identified.
_ _ -
_ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -.
_ _ - - - _ -
___
.--
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _.._ _ _ ____- ___-____ _ - _
_ - - _ _
-e
.
.
-
,
-3-
..
,
,
,..
DETAILS
- 1.
Persons Contacted HL&P
,
- C, A. Ayala, Licensing Supervisor
- W. S. Blair, Maintenance Support Manager
- M. H. Carnley, Instrument'and Control Manager
- R. W. Chewning, Nuclear Assurance Vice Fresident P. J. Christiansen, Surveillance Coordinator
- S. M.j Dew, Nuclear Purchasing and Materials Management Manager W. M. Dowdy, Jr., Unit 2 Shift Supervisor V. J. Tedners. Unit 1. Shift Supervisor
- J. E. Geiger, Nuclear Assurance General Manager B. E. Post, Systems Engineering
- T. J. Jordan, Plant Engineering Manager
- A. K. Khosla Licensing Engineer
- W. H.'Kinsey, Plant Manager
- M. A. McDurnett, Licensing Manager
- V. A. Simonis, Plant Operations Support Manager L. T. Smith, Supervisor:
-D. S. Sorensen, Technical Supervisor
- M. R. Wisenburg, Plant Superintendent NRC R. J. Evans, Resident Inspector D. L. Garrison, Resident Inspector
- J. 1. Tapia Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those persons thet attended the exit interview on July 14, 1989.
The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel during the inspection.
2.
Inspection of Inservice Testina (IST), Units 1 and 2 - Pumps and Valves (73756)
.The objectives of this inspection were to observe functional testing of L
pumps and valves for the purpose of assessing the adequacy of the testing performed with respect to the licensee's concitments and requirements of I
.
Section XI of the ASME Code, 1983 Edition through Suceer 1983 Addenda.
a.
Unit 1 - Pump Tests During the inspection, the inspector accompanied Unit 1 plant operations personnel to observe functional testing on the following pumps:
l
_ _ _ _ __________________ _ ____.___ ___
yy
_.
+
--
--
-
=
- - - - - - - - - - m 9-
<
g y
s
,
,
n
,
,
,
-
.
- 4
.,.
w.
-4
.
,
.
.
L
.
Centrifugal. Charging Pump 1B, Inservice Test
' Procedure IPSP03-CV-0002; and
- '
Auxiliary Feedwater Pump 13, Inservice Test Procedure 1 PSP 03-AF-0003.
.b.
Unit-2 - Pump'and Valve Tests During the inspection :the inspector accompanied Unit 2 plant operations. personnel to observe functional testing on the following
' pumps and valve:
W Residual. Heat Removal Pump 2B, Inservice Test
Procedure 2 PSP 03-RH-0002;
,
Low Head. Safety Injection Pump 28 Inservice = Test
Procedure,2 PSP 03-SI-0002;
High Head. Safety Injection Psmp 28. Inservice Test Frocedure 2 PSP 03-SI-0005', and Normal ContainmentePurge; Supply, Penetration M-42 (Valves HC-0007 and8). Local Leakage Rate Test, Procedure OPSP11-HC-0002.
c.
Results During the tests, the inspector observed operators following step-by-step procedure process in conjunction with the. testing and.the recording of test data.
In addition, the inspector observed required, independent l'
verifications and examined portable test equipment for calibration status.-
For each of the tests witnessed, the inspector reviewed the four preceding test results for a comparison of each of the respective components. The inspector observed that all test results were within the reference value envelope established for each component.
Additional observations made by the inspector included the following:
Test procedures appeared to be well detailed, including such
attributes as: purpose and scope; prerequisites; precautions; pretest verification; corrective action; acceptance criteria; and independent verifications.
- Each test was conducted by the cognizant shif t recctor operator located in the control' room, in accordance with the applicable test procedure.
- -
Control room activities were disciplined and reflected an L
atmosphere of professionalism.
No violations or deviations were identified.
_ - _
_ _ _ _
-_.
_
lL
...
.
,
f l-5-
.
l
.
3.
Exit Interview
,
The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on July 14, 1989, and sumarized the inspection scope and findings. The licensee did not identify, as proprietary, any of the information provided to or reviewed by the inspector.
l i
)
i l
- _. _
_. _ _
_-.
_ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _