IR 05000498/1998004

Insp Repts 50-498/98-04 & 50-499/98-04 on 980214-0321. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering,Plant Support

ML20217A868
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	04/20/1998
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20217A798	List: IR 05000498/1998004 ML20217A793 ML20217A845
References
50-498-98-04, 50-498-98-4, 50-499-98-04, 50-499-98-4, NUDOCS 9804220348
Download: ML20217A868 (13)

Text

, . . . .

.

.

"

EtLQ.LOSURE 2 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

Docket Nos.: 50-498 50-499 License Nos.: NPF-76 NPF-80 Report No.: 50-498/98-04 50-499/98-04 Licensee: STP Nuclear Operating Company Facility: South Texas Project Electnc Generating Sts*!on, Units 1 and 2 Location: FA' 521 - 8 miles west of Wadsworth Wadswodh, Texas 77483 Dates: February 14 through March 21,1998 Inspector (s): Wayne C. Sifre, Acting Senior Resident inspector Harry A. Freeman, Resident inspector, Comanche Peak Ronald A. Kopriva, Project Engineer, Branch A Thomas. W. Alexion, Project Manager Projects Division IV-1 Approved By: Joseph I. Tapia, Chief, Project Branch A Division of Reactor Projects Attachment: Supplemental Information l

l 9804220348 980420 PDR ADOCK 05000498 G PDR

.

.

.

.. ..

..

.

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 NRC inspection Report 50-498/98-04; 50-499/98-04 The resident inspection included aspects of licensee operations, engineering, maintenance, and plant support. The report covers a 6-week period of resident inspectio Ooerations

-

The control room operator performance was good. Effective communication and self-verification techniques were utilized. Shift turnovers were thoroug The emergency : ore cooling systems in both units were properly maintained and aligned to satisfy Technical Specification requirements. One minor labeling discrepancy was identified by the inspectors and reported to the licensee for correctio Maintenance

.

Technician performance during corrective and preventive maintenance activities was very good. Work packages and instructions provided adequate detail and vendor information was properly incorporated

.

Failure to account for the effect of test instrumentation during troubleshooting of Standby Diesel Generator 13 complicated the troubleshooting effort and delayed restoration of the diesel generator to operable statu .

Surveillance testing observed was well conducted in accordance with approved procedures and properly implemented the Technical Specification surveillance requirement Enaineerina

An inadequate unreviewed safety question review resulted in the licensee implementing a change to the facility as described in the UFSAR without prior NRC review and approva Plant Suocort

-

Observed activities involving radiological controls and security were performed in a professional manne Report Details Summarv of Plant Status

-

Units 1 and 2 operated at essentially 100 percent power throughout this inspection perio . l. Operations 01 Conduct of Operations O1.1 Control Room Observations (Units 1 and 2) insoection Scoce (71707)

Using inspection Procedure 71707, the inspectors routinely observed the conduct of operations in the Units 1 and 2 control rooms. Frequent reviews of control board status, routine attendance at shift turnover meetings, observations of operator performance, and reviews of control room logs and documentation were performe Observations and Findinas During ruutine observations and interviews, the inspectors determined that the control room operators were continually aware of existing plant conditions. Operators responded to annunciator alarms in accordance with approved procedures. Annunciator l alaims were promptly announced to the control room staff who, in tum, acknowledged by

! restating the announcement. The unit supervisors remained cognizant of ongoing

l activities. Operators' use of self-verification techniques was evident. The engineered i l safety features systems in both units were verified to be aligned in accordance with

! Technical Specification requirements.

'

The inspectors routinely attended shift turnover meetings. The onshift operators provided clear and concise information to oncoming operators. Oncoming operators routinely reviewed the control room logs, discussed current plant conditions, and verified major equipment statu Conclusions Control room operator performance was good. Effective communication and self-verification techniques were utilized. Shift turnovers were thoroug !

.

i

.

.

-2-02- Operational Status of Facilities and Equipment O2.1 Plant Tours (Units 1 and 21 insoection Scone (71707)

The inspectors routinely toured the accessible portions of the plant areas in Units 1 and 2. Areas of special attention during this inspection period included:

• Units 1 and 2 mechanical and electrical auxiliary buildings e Units 1 and 2 fuel handling buildings e Units 1 and 2 turbine generator buildings 1,

o Standby Diesel Generators 11,12,13, and 2 * Units 1 and 2 auxiliary feedwater pump rooms Findinos and Observations The inspectors found that plant equipment was maintained in excellent material -

condition. Plant housekeeping and area lighting was good. Identified minor deficiencies were communicated to the appropriate shift supervisor and were promptly correcte Licensee management was routinely observed monitoring ongoing activities in the plan Conclusions The inspectors concluded that equipment availchility and material condition were excellent and plant housekeeping was goo O2.2 Enaineered Safety Features Svstem Walkdown Insoection Scone (71707)

The inspectors performed detailed system walkdowns of the accessible portions of A, B, and C train emergency core cooling systems in Units.1 and 2. The inspectors verified proper valve, control board, and electrical alignment in accordance with the following plant operating procedures and piping and instrumentation drawings (P&lDs);

e OPOP02-CS-0001, Revision 5, " Containment Spray Standby Lineup" e OPOP02-SI-0002, Revision 7, " Safety injection System Initial Lineup" e P&lD SN109F05037, " Containment Spray"

r'

1 .

-3-e P&lD 5N129F05013, " Safety injection'

• P&lD SN129F05014, " Safety injection" e P&lD SN129F05015, " Safety injection" Observations and findinas The inspectors found that the systems were properly aligned to assure system operability in accordance with applicable procedures and P&lDs, and that these alignments satisfied Technical Specifications requirements. Valves identified in the Technical Specifications and UFSAR as locked or de-energized were properly aligned. Major components were properly labeled, lubricated and free of identifiable leakag I '

The inspectors identified one labeling discrepancy in the containment spray systems of both units. The labels on drain valves for the containment spray test lines did not agree with the valve numbers indicated on the associated P&lDs. The valves were in the proper position to support system operability. This minor discrepancy was reported to i the shift supervisors and was documented in a condition repor Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the emergency core cooling systems in both units were

! properly maintained and aligned to satisfy Technical Specifications requirements. One minor labeling discrepancy was identified by the inspectors and reported to the licensee

! for correctio Operator Training and Qualification 05.1 (Closed) Violation 498:499 97003-01: Failure to Meet Requalification Program Requirements. The inspector verified that the corrective actions described in the licensee's response letter dated July 2,1997, were complete. No similar problems were {

identifie II. Maintenance M1 Conduct of Maintenance j M1.1 General Comments on Field Maintenance Activities Insoection Scooe (62707) .

The inspectors observed portions of the following ongoing maintenance activit;es identified by their Work Authorization Number:

l I

i

, i

-

l l

l-4-

• 132723 Standby Diesel Generator 13 Low Lube-Oil Trip Troubleshooting and Repair (Unit 1) j l

e 95160 Inspect, Lubricate, and Test 4160 VAC Switchgear E2A Cubicle 11 Component Cooling Water Pump Motor Circuit Breaker (Unit 2)  !

i

'

b. Observations and Findinas

)

in general, performance of observed preventive and corrective maintenance activities l was very good. Work was performed under appropriate supervision. Work packages !

and instructions provided adequate detail. Vendor information was properly incorporated j into work instruction On March 10,1998, licensed operators performed a fast restart of Standby Diesel Generator 13 following a 24-hour surveillance run in accordance with Plant Surveillance i Procedure OPSP03-DG-0018, Revision 7, " Standby Diesel Generator 13 Twenty-Four ,

Hour Load Test." Twenty seconds after starting, the diesel generator tripped on a "Lo-Lo !

Lube Oil" signal. The surveillance test was suspended and engineering, maintenance l and planning were contacted to develop a troubleshooting pla l l

The licensee developed Work Order 372685 to implement troubleshooting and repair of Standby Diesel Generator 13. Maintenance technicians and system engineers  ;

performed a series of closely monitored tests to identify the source of the trip signal. As '

a result of the tests and consultation with the diesel generator vendor, the engineers determined that the trip signal was caused by the turbocharger lube-oil pressure ,

switches, in their troubleshooting efforts, the technicians installed precision pressure !

gauges in the sensing lines for the pressure switches to monitor pressures after startu The normal pressure switch trip setpoint was 30 psi with a nonadjustable reset of 1.5 psi above setpoint. The trip circuit had a time delay function which blocked the trip signal for 20 seconds to allow oil pressure to rise to above reset during startup. During trouble shooting, technicians determined that the oil pressure in the sensing lines did not rise above reset within 20 seconds.

In their repair efforts, the technicians drained the sensing lines to the pressure switches with the lube oil circulation pump running. Air was removed from the lines foi '

approximately 10 minutes before oil began draining from the lines. Additionally, small l l

particles of gasket material were found in the oil. Once the engineers were satisfied that the sensing lines had been adequately flushed and all air removed, the lines were returned to normal configuration for testing. During subsequent testing, the sensing line pressure response had improved but would not consistently clear the trip signal. After ;

further evaluation and testing, the engineers determined that the temporarily installed pressure gauges and associated tubing were causing sufficient dampening of the sensing line response to prevent the trip signal from clearing within 20 seconds. The gages were removed and the system performed satisfactorily and consistently.

<

<

,

l:

'

l

• l

!

'

l

\

The inspectors reviewed Condition Report 98-4080 and associated evaluations that i documented this event. The licensee attributed the dampened response of the lube oil l pressure switches to the presence of debris and air in the sensing lines. The debris consisted of small particles of gasket material. Licensee engineers stated that the size and amount of debris was not unusual. The engineers also stated that the sensing lines were a dead leg that did not get any through flow. As a result, any debris that enters the 4 sensing lines would stay there until the lines were flushed out during maintenance. The engineers also identified maintenance practices as a potential cause for the air trapped I

in the sensing lines. During routine preventive maintenance, compressed air was used l to test and calibrate the pressure switches. Once the testing was complete the air was

!-

bled out of the lines through drain valves. The engineers stated that because of the l

location of the valves, not all of the air was bled out of the lines by this method. The r

licensee has developed the following corrective ections to prevent a recurrence of this event.

i

, o Revise the preventive maintenance procedure to include displacing stagnant lube l oil and to purge all air from the sensing lines.

I l e Evaluate a possible increase in margin between the trip pressure and the normal l

operating pressure of the lube oil system.

j This event was identified by the licensee as a maintenance rule functional failure and a l valid failure of the Standby Diesel Generator 13. As a result, the licensee will be performing additional verification tests on an increased fiequency in accordance with Technical Specification Conclusions l In general, technician performance during corrective and preventive maintenance

! activities observed was very good. Work packages and instructions provided adequate detail and vendor information was properly incorporated. Failure to account for the effect of test instrumentation during troubleshooting of Standby Diesel Generator 13 j complicated the troubleshooting effort and delayed restoration of the diesel generator to l operable statu M1.2 General Comments on Surveillance Testing L insoection Scone (61726)

The inspectors observed portions of the following surveillance activities: l e OPSP03-DG-0018, Revision 7, " Standby Diesel Generator 13 Twenty-Four Hour Load Test"

I

!

l

{ ,

.

-6-e OPSP06-PK-0008, Revision 8, "4.16KV Class 1E Degraded Voltage Relay l Channel Calibration and Trip Actuation Device Operability Test, Channel 4 on l E2C"

! Observations and Findings The observed surveillance tests were well performed utilizing approved procedures. The tests properly implamented Technical Specification surveillance requirements. Plant j operators were observed performing detailed walkdowns of equipment during testing i j

'

activities. System engineers provided good support during the collection of data for j equipmer$t performance trending. Communication between control room operators and plant operators in the field was goo ;

l i l Conclusions Surveillance testing observed was well conducted in accordance with approved l l procedures and properly implemented the Technical Specification surveillance  :

j requirements.

lll Engineering  !

,

I i

! E1 Conduct of Engineering  !

'

l

'

E CFR 50.59 Evaluation Review

! Inspection Scope (37551)  ;

i ( The Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) staff performed an in-office review of the ;

l licensee's 10 CFR 50.59 Summary Report dated December 17,1996. The NRR staff 1 l selected Unreviewed Safety Question Evaluation (USOE) 96-0012, titled, "UFSAR CN-l 2012 / Update UFSAR Tables to Reflect New LOCA Radiological Analysis," for further revie Observations and Findinos

During a review of the Chapter 15 design basis loss of coolant accident (LOCA)

calculation (Calculation NC-6013) for the improved Technical Specification initiatives, the licensee discovered an error in the analysis of radiation released. Calculation NC-6013 l stopped calculating the dose in the control room and the Technical Support Center (TSC)

at the time the containment purge valve closed (in 23 seconds). Regulatory guidance requires a 30-day dose for the control room and the TSC. Therefore, stopping the calculation at 23 seconds incorrectly excluded the dose contribution resulting from the residual radioactivity already accumulated in the control room and the TS The NRR staff reviewed the licensee's 10 CFR 50.59 documentation and supporting recalculation of the radiological consequences of a LOCA, and concluded that this

'

l

change involved an unreviewed safety question (USO). Table 3 on page 9 of 9 in the licensee's analysis indicates that integrating the doses resulting from releases through the containment purge valve for 30 days, results in a thyroid dose to the control room operator of 23.26 rem. This is an increase from the 22.67 rem previously indicated in Table 6.4.2 of the UFSAR. This increase in the radiological consequences of this analyzed accident meets the definition of a USQ in 10 CFR 50.59(a)(2)(l).

1 CQDclusions I The calculated onsite and offsite doses resulting from the reanalysis of the radiological consequences of a LOCA are within the acceptance crite ria in the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800) and are, therefore, acceptable to the NRC staff. However,10 CFR 50.59 l requires NRC review and acceptance of this design basis change prior to its implementation. The failure to obtain prior NRC approval of a change in the facility as !

described in the UFSAR, that involves a USQ, is a violation of 10 CFR 50.59(a)(1)(l)

(498;499/98004-01).

E1.2 Review of Heat Loadina and Setooints for Emeroenev Core Coolina System Pumo and Valve Rooms (37551)

In conjunction with the ESF system walkdowns described in Section O2.2 of this report, the inspectors reviewed the heat loading and room cooler setpoints for the emergency core cooling system pump and valve rooms. The calculations were documented in Calculation SV120MC5160, " Fuel Handling Building Cooling Load." The inspector found the calculations thorough and consistent with the UFSAR description and the as-built system configuration. The associated setpoints were appropriate for the calculated heat loading and include,a adequate margi E8 Miscellaneous Engineering issues E8.1 (Closed) Licensee Event Reoorts 50-498/97001-00 and 50-498/97001-01; failure to fully meet the requirements of Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.7.13 for ensuring monitored areas meet their temperature limits. This report and supplement documented incorrect repeatability tolerances for room temperatmo switches, which resulted in a nonconservative accuracy value used for est olishing a setpoint. This condition was identified during a licensee engineering evaluatio The licensee implemented the following corrective actions for this event:

i e Room temperatures were monitored and logged once 9er shift by plant operators until the switches were recalibrated or repace * Allidentified temperature switch setpoints were reevaluate e Temperature switches were recalibrated with the more rigorous setpoints or replace f 1

.

'

-8-l l

l The licensee also determined that the areas monitored were routinely toured every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> and that an abnormally high temperature would have been noted, and that any room temperature that exceeded the limit by 30*F would alarm in the control room. The inspector reviewed the licensee's corrective actions and found them to i be appropriat The inspectors concluded thct the licensee had failed to adequately satisfy Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.7.13. This licensee-identified and corrected violation is being treated as a noncited violation, consistent with Section Vll.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Poliev (498;499/98004-02). j E8.2 (Closed) Licensee Event Reoort 50-498/97004-00; 4160 volt bus undervoltage logic circuitry not fully tested by surveillance procedures. While performing reviews of the 4160 volt bus undervoltage logic, in accordance Generic Letter 96-01, the licensee identified that the surveillance tests did not fully perform the trip actuating device operational test in that the procedures did not provide assurances that a failure in one actuation scheme would not mask a failure in the other actuation scheme. The licensee declared the 4160 volt bus undervoltage logic function inoperable and entered Technical Specifications 3.0.3 and 4.0.3 in both units. The licensee then developed and tested the undervoltage logic function which ensured that both actuation schemes were operable. This method was incorporated into the appropriate surveillance procedures. The inspector reviewed the licensee's corrective actions and found them to be appropriat The inspectors concluded that the licensee had f ailed to adequately satisfy Technical Specification Surveillance requirement 4.3.2.1. This licensee-identified and corrected violation is being treated as a noncited violation, consistent with Section Vll B.1 of the NBC Enforcement Poliev (498:499/98004-03).

l E (Closed) Licensee Event Recod 50-498/97008-00; engineered safety features containment spray actuation relays slave relay not fully tested by surveillance. This report documented that the containment spray pump circuit breaker, which was tested by inservice test procedures. no loriger met the Technical Specification surveillance interval i following a frequency change to the inservice test. The licensee revised the inservice test procedures to prevent future similar problems. The inspector reviewed Procedures OPSP03-CS-0001, " Containment Spray Pump 1 A(2A) Inservice Test."

l OPSP03-CS-0002, " Containment Spray Pump 1B(2B) Inservice Test," and l OPSP03-CS-0003," Containment Spray Pump 1C(2C) Inservice Test." One section of l each procedure performed an inservice test of the respective pump on a 6-month schedule. Another section of each procedure tested the pump circuit breaker. The procedures aporopriately referenced the Technical Specification surveillance test requirements. The inspector found that the corrective actions were appropriate.

I c

l~

.

'

I I -9-l The inspectors concluded that the license 6 had failed to adequately satisfy Technical Specification Surveillance requirement 4.3.2.1. This licensee-identified and corrected violation is being treated as a noncited violation, consistent with Section Vll.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Poliev (498;499/ 98004-04).

IV. Plant Suonort

'

R1 Radiological Protection and Chemistry Controls Radiological housekeeping in the areas toured was' very good. Doors required to be locked in accordance with Technical Specification 6.1.12.2 and the licensee's radiological program were properly secured. Work observed in radiological controlled areas was performed in accordance with approved radiological work permit S1 Conduct of Security and Safeguards Activities i On a daily basis, the inspectors observed the practices of security personnel and the condition of security equipment. Protected and vital area barriers were in good conditio Temporary compensatory measures were implemented as appropriate. Personnel

! access measures and equipment searches for contraband were routinely good. The

i inspectors concluded that daily security activities were conducted in an appropriate l manner.

l l V. Management Meetinas I

X1 Exit Meeting Summary l The inspectors presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at !

l the conclusion of the inspection on November 8,1997. The licensee acknowledged the l findings presented. The inspectors asked the licensee whether any materials examined l_ during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was j' identifie '

!

I ,

! I i

('

(.

.

ATTACHMENT '

RUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION l PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED i

Licensee W. Cottle, President and Chief Executive Officer J. Groth, Vice President Nuclear Generation I

S. Head, Licensing Supervisor A. Kent, Manager Electrical /l&C Systems, Engineering l B. Masse, Plant Manager, Unit 2 l G. Parkey, Plant Manager, Unit 1

'

INSPECTION PROCEDURES (IP) USED IP 37551: Onsite Engineering j IP 61726: Surveillance Observations IP 62707: Maintenance Observation IP 71707: Plant Operations I IP 71750: Plant Support IP 92700: Onsite Followup of Written Reports at Power Reactor Facilities l IP 92901: Followup - Operations ( IP 92903: Followup - Engineering ITEMS OPENED AND CLOSED Ooened  !

498;499/98004-01 VIO Implementation of a change in the facility as described in

the UFSAR, that involves an unreviewed safety question without prior NRC review and approval.

! 498;499/98004-02 NCV Fai!ure to fully meet the requirements of Technical l Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.7.13 for ensuring i

monitored areas meet their temperature limit ;499/98004-03 NCV 4160 volt bus undervoltage logic circuitry not fully tested by surveillance procedure ;499/98004-04 NCV Engineered safety features containment spray actuation relays slave relay not fully tested by surveillance.

i

F 1 *

.

.

Closed 498;499/97003-01 VIO Failure to meet requalification requirements.

I 498;499/98004-02 NCV Failure to fully meet the requirements of Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.7.13 for ensuring monitored areas meet their temperature limit ;499/98004-03 NCV 4160 volt bus undervoltage logic circuitry not fully tested by surveillance procedure ;499/98004-04 NCV Engineered safety features containment spray actuation relays slave relay not fully tested by surveillanc /97-001-00 LER Failure to fully meet the requirements of Technical j Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.7.13 for ensuring '

monitored areas meet their temperature limit /97-001-01 LER Failure to fully meet the requirements of Technical Specification Surveillai.ce Requirement 4.7.13 for ensuring monitored areas meet their temperature limit /97-004-00 LER 4160 voit bus undervoltage logic circuitry not fully tested by surveillance procedure l 50-499/97-008-00 LER Engineered safety features containment spray actuation i relays slave relay not fully tested by surveillanc )

l l

l