ML18153B868
| ML18153B868 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1989 |
| From: | Buckley B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stewart W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908310250 | |
| Download: ML18153B868 (5) | |
Text
.
Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 Mr. W. L. Stewart Senior Vice President - Power Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060
Dear Mr. Stewart:
August 23, 198~
DISTRIBUTION Docket Fi le NRC & Local PDRs PDII-2 Reading SVarga, 14/E/4 Glainas, 14/H/3 HBerkow DMi ller BBuckley OGC (info. only)
EJordan, 3302 MNBB BGri mes, 9/ A/ 2 ACRS ( 10)
MS in ku le, RII NHunemuller
SUBJECT:
SURRY UNITS 1 AND 2 - SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION The staff has completed its review of your initial Simulator Certification submittal for the Surry Power Station dated November 23, 1988. This review has identified several areas in which there is, as yet, inadequate information and data to ensure complete documentation of your certification. These areas are described in the enclosure.
You are requested to provide the additional data and your reply to the questions no later than October 16, 1989 so that this information may be promptly incorporated in the staff's records.
If you cannot meet this schedule, please contact me as soon as possible.
As indicated above, our review is only to ensure completeness of documentation.
The review does not, nor is it intended to, verify the accuracy of the data or statements made in the certification, nor provide NRC approval of the acceptability of a particular simulator for use in administering operating tests.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping Tequirements contained in this letter affect fewer than 10 respondents; therefore, 0MB clearance is not required under P. L.96-511.
If you require additional information or clarification about this letter or its enclosure, please contact me on (301) 492-1452.
~ri0831025o a9oa23 PR ADOCK osooo2ao PNU
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
See next page
[SURRY RAI J 0r11n PM:PDII~i BBuckley:b ld 08/2,}/89 Sincerely, Original signed by Bart C. Buckley, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation D:P~2 HBb;WJ'w 08/~)/89
I
- Mr. W. L. Stewart Virginia Electric and Power Company cc:
Michael W. Maupin, Esq.
Hunton and Williams Post Office Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 Mr. Michael R. Kansler, Manager Surry Power Station Post Office Box 315 Surry, Virginia 23883 Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 166, Route 1 Surry, Virginia 23883 Mr. Sherlock Holmes, Chairman Board of Supervisors of Surry County Surry County Courthouse Surry, Virginia 23683 Mr. W. T. Lough Virginia Corporation Commission Division of Energy Regulation Post Office Box 1197 Richmond, Virginia 23209 I
Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 C. M. G. Buttery, M.D., MJ'.H.
Department of Health 109 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Surry Power Station Attorney General Supreme Court Building 101 North 8th Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mr. W. R. Cartwright Vice President - Nuclear Operations Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Old Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon Vice President - Nuclear Services Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Old Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Mr. R. F. Saunders Manager - Nuclear Licensing Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Old Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060
e REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION SURRY UNITS 1 AND 2 ENCLOSURE
- 1.
All of the fuel exposures indicated in Appendix 3 of Attachment 2, "Initial Conditions" appear to be the same. ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985 requires that initial conditions include various times in core life. Please confirm that the "Core Aging" function is the means by which you satisfy this criteria ~r provide justification for exception.
- 2.
The "Steady-State Stability" test at 100 percent power described on page 17 of Attachment 3 appears to be the only test performed for steady-state operation. ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 4.1, specifies the performance criteria for steady-state operation and requires that comparisons be made for "interim power levels for which valid reference plant informa-tion is available" and that "During testing, the accuracy of computed values shall be determined for a minimum of three points over the power range." Please provide performance test abstracts for the tests required by ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 4.1, or provide justification for exception to these requirements.
- 3.
The tests described in Attachment 3 do not appear to include tests for ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 3.1.1 "Normal Plant Evolutions," items:
"(7) Startup, shutdown and power operations with less than full reactor coolant flow;" and
"(9) Core performance testing such as plant heat balance, determination of shutdown margin, and measurement of reactivity coefficients and control rod worth using permanently installed instrumentation."
Please provide performance test abstracts for these tests or provide justification for exception to performance of these tests.
- 4.
The results of the test for "Plant Cooldown From Intermediate Shutdown To Cold Shutdown" indicate that the mass balance in the feedwater system may be flawed.
This was also indicated in the examination report from operating tests given on October 25-27, 1988 in item 8 of Enclosure 4, "Simulation Facility Fidelity Report."
However, in Attachment 7, "Simulator Upgrade Schedule," the feedwater system is not included.
Please confirm that the feedwater system is adequately modeled to meet the requirements of Section 4.2, "Transient Opera ti on, 11 of ANSI/ ANS-3.5-1985 or provide justification for exception.
- 5.
The results of the test in Attachment 3 for "Plant Startup From Hot Shutdown To Full Power Conditions" and Simulator Modification Reports (SMRs) 8612031600 and 8702121257 on page 19 of Attachment 8 indicate deficiencies with the core model which were to be corrected by December 1988.
The "Simulation Facility Fidelity Report" from the operating tests
.given on October 25-27, 1988 also described a core modeling problem in Item 10 with respect to rod worth.
Please confirm that the core is adequately modeled to meet the requirements of Section 4.2, "Transient Opera ti on," of ANSI/ ANS-3.5-1985 or provide justification for exception.
I I
e 6.
The results of the- "Surveillance Tests" on page 87 of Attachment 3 state that the plant computer was not able "to support all of the necessary aspects of the tests." Attachment 6, on page 13, under "Plant Computer_
P-250 Operator Station" states that "The reference plant computer station is fully simulated with the exceptions of some tasks that are beyond the scope of simulation." Also item 1 of the aforementioned "Simulation Facility Fidelity Report" states "The P-250 CRT screen was not reliable in consistently providing status information." _ Please confirm that, with the upgrade which was scheduled to be complete by February 28, 1989, the plant computer meets the requirements of ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 3.2.2 or provide justification for exception.
- 7., the "Simulator Performance Test Schedule," states "The Transient Performance Tests of ANS-3.5-1985 Appendix B, Section B.2.2 will be conducted annually." ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Appendix B, Section B.2.1, "Steady State Performance" tests are also required annually.
Please confirm your intent to perform steady-state tests as well as transient tests or provide justification for exception.
- 8.
In Attachment 5 on page 8 regarding "Photo #19" it is noted that a sound-.
powered phone jack is missing.
In Attachment 6 on page 13 it is noted that some of the communications systems at the Shift Supervisor's Console are not opera ti ona 1.
SMR 8511050901 on page 9 of Attachment 8 and SMR 84002 on page 12 of Attachment a._also describe communications systems deficiencies. - ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 3.2.3, "Control Room Environment" requires that "Communication systems that a control room operator would use to communicate with an auxiliary operator or other support activities shall be operational tp the extent that the simulator instructor, when performing these remote activities, shall be able to communicate over the appropriate communication system.
11 Please confirm that the simulator meets this requirement or provide justification for_
exception.
- 9.
In Attachment 5, "Physical Fidelity Report," there are 52 pages of physical fidelity discrep_ancies encompass_ing over 400 separate items.
Over 90 percent of these items were scheduled to be corrected by December 1988.
SMR 8810031212 and SMR 8810042145 on pages 14 and 15, respectively, of Attachment 8 also relate to physical fidelity discrepancies.
Please confirm that the simulator meets the requirements of ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 3.2.1, "Degree.. oJ Panel Simulation" and Section 3.2.2, "Controls on Panels" or provide justification for exception to these requirements.
- 10. - In Attachment 8, "Discrepancy Backlog/And Resolution Sche-dule, 11 of the 160 SMRs, many appear to be more than five years old according to their SMR Numbers., "Configuration Management Overview Document,"
does not describe any resolution time for evaluating and incorporating SMRs.
Please confirm that your configuration management program meets the requirements of ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, Section 5.2, "Simulator Update Design Data" or provide justification for exception to these requirements.
e 11.
For Unit 2, NRC Form 474 did not have the box for exceptions checked, however Attachments 1 ~nd 2 describe differences between Unit 2 and the simulator.
Please confirm that, for Unit 2, the Unit 1 simulator meets the guidance contained in ANSI/ANS-3.5-1985, as endorsed by NRC Regulatory Guide 1.149, without exception or provide justification for any exceptions taken.
.:,**