ML20087A099

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 680130 Meeting W/Util at Site Re Outstanding Issues Relating to Insp Program for Facility.W/Attendance List & Summary of Principal Items Discussed
ML20087A099
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 02/20/1968
From: Robert Carlson
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Moseley N
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20086U000 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-95-36 NUDOCS 9508040171
Download: ML20087A099 (10)
v • d • e


Text

. -

/-

[.g - ~~- - -

-~

,,.f-t

=. = - -

.. <. o.

j UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT i

Memorandum 1

To FILE DATs:

February 20, 1968 1 f

THRU N. C. Moseley, Sr. Reactor Inspector Region I, Division of Compliance 4' g PaoM :

R. T. Carlson, Reactor Inspector g,l dp jl Region I, Division of Compliance suaJact:

MINUTES OF COMPLIANCE = JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT

. /. -!

j,

. COMPANY MEETING, JANUARY 30, 1968. OYSTER CREEK UNIT

< o NO. 1, DOCKET NO. 50-219 i

A meeting was held between representatives of Jersey Central Power & Light Company, General Electric Company and CO on January 30, 1968, at the site of Oyster Creek Unit No. 1.

A list of attendees is provided in Attachment A.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss outstanding issues relating to the Co inspection program for this facility, specifically those pertaining to pre-operational testing, initial core loading,and the startup test program.

4 Initially, GE (Mr. Foreman) presented a brief outline of.

their plans for start-up testing, including the site organization to be utilized.

The remainder of the meeting was devoted to a discussion of the subject matter described above.

A summary of the principal items discussed and the related results is provided in Attachment B.

As is indicated, some degree of resolution was accomplished.

Additional follow-up will be required by Co.

All of the items will be discussed in future inspection

)

reports.

a,. -

~

j 7

+

.(;E m

s t

~

9508040171 950227 I

PDR FOIA DEKOK95-36 PDR o e Bay U.S. Soning Bends Koplaiy en the Po,yroll Soring Plan

..__a_.-._.

,, s g -- -

.. c s :-y '

't e

n.

i

[>.

l

^TT^C""""' ^

.1 Attendees d

MEETING WITH JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO.'

4 January 30.-1968-

-N' ABC 40MPLIANCE M

'~

}

J. P.,O'Reilly T. J. McCluskey F. J. Nolan I. R. Finfrock, Jr.

D. E. HeArick 3

J. G. Keppler N. C. Moseley C. E. Agan R. T. Carlson R. W. Sullivan M. S. Hildreth, Jr.

~

_G E

' JCP&L CONSULTANTS D. K. Willett F. Schwoerer, Picker, Laws i..

K. W. Hess

& Assoc.

T.

R.. Robbins, NUS Corp.

x l

R. C. Christianson, San Jose

~

C. E. Foresnan, San Jose D. L. Peterson,. San Jose E

w e

r

..f 3

e N

i t

n

-t t

e e

1 b

\\

l e

l

~

t e

I

.._ ~.

I

--g-

A-Llefy '

~

Q

}

}

J f'

.g e

AT5hQD0 TNT B

}

t ds;!?,

~

' PRINCIPAL ITEMS OF DISCUSSION IMI COMPLIANCE INSFBCTION PROGRAM

  • %e e.

4 w...

,.q, L f MEETING WI'Hf JERSBY OBfTRAL PCNER & LIGHT CO.

I' January 30, 1968~

icig i

a

...a...

. Pre-operat onai l Tes' tina

&[.

A.

%s t

~

g' 1.

Control Rod Drive Hydraulic system GE's program for cold tiesting of the drives prior

'.4^,

to initial fuel looping had'previously been re-viewed by co and, following revis49n, found to be acceptable.*

S e program, summarized here for purposes of continuity, includes the following:

m.

5 scrams, all rods F

.s!. w.:

~ N.,-

b.

25 scrams, fastest and slowest rods s

a yl N

e

~5 J c.

8 drive cycles (full in and full out), all rods t

7,,,

d.

Simultaneous scram 136 of 137 rods (from scram

.,,lH discharge volume high water-level trip)

L i

GE's preloading drive test program does not include

+ [,,

testing at elevated temperaturgs.- noir position is

,Ws that, without the addition of a temporary, large

?,': c;.;

capacity heat source, they do not have the capabilityE t ?

of maintaining the primary system at temperature with' S'@

Apl; the control drive system in operatign.

In support pf 7,

a position of confidence ~with respect to the relia-bility of the drives, GE spumarized briefly the pre.

installation testing conducted on the oyster Creek

.K units at San Jose.

Included in the tests as a

  • -W -

t spectrum of simulated an1 functions and earthquake 9,?,,p,Y conditions.

C0 stated that the described testing 71 l

was interesting and desirably but only as a supplement % g to, not as a substitute for, in-place testing.

,,. M g-

.r z ;.q It was stated, however, that in ' view of the cirem-stances'- lack gf adequate heat source - the omission Y :/

of proloading, in 9 ace. testing at elevated tempera-f,-

1

., : p; A.Q^"'%

', J.c. ',

, 219/68-1Myyl.M..-

+

, '1. y,

^

4 aco Inspection amport

.a

...s.

e w.

]

A.

O w[.

O

.3 i

+1' I'

2-

, j.

1 I

tures would be acceptable to co if properly sub-stituted for in subsequent testing.'

During subsequent

(

discussion, GE agreed to review their proposed program-if '

for testing with fuel in place,'taking into considera-tion modifications suggested by Co.

The proposed

]

i program and the changes suggested by Co are shown in

]

p;j the following tables Nuclear Heat

"~'

0

' S' Ambient "300 F*

1000**-

+

TEST Temp.

(Non-Nuc) 300 psi 600 psi psi '100%Pw '

4

~

=

=

All

~ Friction Check All'

=

=

i scram:

4 4

AMAP*** All-Normal Accum.' Charge All All l 4

-=

Minimum Charge 4'

4

=

=

Zero Charge 4

'- ~.

High Level i

4 In/Out All All During previous discussions on drive testing during i

i loading, GE agreed that-following the assembly of I.

~

^

each control cell, the rod will be driven to the full-out position twice, driven to the full-in c

position once and scrammed once - all at ambient temperature.****

However, they did not propose to time each of the scram tests.. During this meeting a

they agreed to reconsider timing each of the scram tests.

a M

f GE made note of the fact that the above described tests will be supplemented by the experience gained 1,

by rod driving conducted over and above the' test.

.g program.

g

'.l.

co will follow-up on the several areas highlighted ~,

~

s above.

  • suggested by Co.
    • Rated temperature and pressure (50 - 100 Mwt)
      • GE proposed 4.

C0 suggested as many as possible (up to i

80% of total based on licensee estimates)'

.3-

~

        • co Inspection Report 219/68-1 i

s

{ -.

~'

4 I'

I k -sm*-vmm **msom m.e

.s

..m

-4

.a

,e

.. 3

y uwm 2,~

n

,. * ~

'r a..

w ;d

.q

~

[

=3 V,

y

'e

- 2.

Vibration Measurements of Reactor Vessel Internals o'. c 3 Y

'Jhe procedure for the subject testing covers both pre-l operational and postoperational phases..CO stated-l

~

that the test procedure was acceptable with the. follow ing exceptions:. Acceptance criteria are not specified,,

~

' and measurements on the steam dryer.are not. included.

1

.Q GE's position' regarding the acceptance criteria was I

that the criteria cannot be stated simply; i.e.,

that

'g s

it was a continual ~ interpretive process and that be='.

2 cause of this they were planning on having.an engineer. ;

knowledgeable in this area available at all times during the testing.

Regarding the steam dryer,'GE-l stated that they omitted taking. measurements here on' the basis that the results at KRB indicated no problem. 1 CO stated that some. general criteria should be included '

as'a minimum.

Also, that measurements should be made' on the steam dryer because of its particular safety l

significance; i.e.,'the' effects that. debris from this F

component could have on the main steam line isolation valves in the event of a steam line break.

GE said'

[

that they would re-examine the subject pru:edure in, "

light of the concern expressed by CO.

00 will' follow-up to a satisfactory resolution.

t

~

3.

Reactor Vessel' Safety Valves and Steam Line Isolation 1

Valves l

' l GE confirmed that the safety valves will now be benchl l

I tested at the site prior to installation.

Regarding

.s.r$

the steam line isolation valves, CO and GE agreed 1

^

l that the tests to be conducted will be those resulting l

from the DRL-JC-GE discussions on this subject, current: i underway.

f'

[

9' 4.

Liquid Poison System i

2 I

The test procedure does not include provisions _-for demonstrating the system's capacity for. injecting' water into the reactor pressure vessel at operating j

l tamqperature and pressure. conditions.' GE stated that'.

l auch a test was unnecessary since the system utilised

  1. 4

..,q.

9['p w1 l y

N-

.+..ew..w,.

.p i

e*'*'*w y

w vg w -=,

my

-.+,g9,g,.,

if a..

~w

~'

gns ; - - >:

'f

.?

72,

~-

).>

\\

4'.

y c

3 g

positive displacement pusps.

CD stated that this fact did not assure a properly functioning system, per se.

GE said that they will review the subject further.

CO will follow-up to a satisfactdry;

' 'j resolution.

d i

.5.

Core spray system s

i-GE confirmed that they will take photographs of flow I

distribution patterns and will measure total flow.

Also, that the results will be compared with the San Jose. tests results to confirm a properly functioning -

system.

6.

Containment spray system 00 stated that the test procedure was adequate.with the exception that it did not provide for m'quantita ',

tive demonstration of distribution.

Also, that a representative number of nozzles should.be monitored 3

in the water test stand rather than only the one proposed.

GE stated that the procedure will be ~re-viewed further in light of these comments and that 1

a proposal would be forthcoming.

CO will follow-up.

i 7.

Condenser and Auxiliaries system - Off Gas System

~

CO stated that the test procedure was adequate with the exception that it did not provide for in-place

)

I efficiency testing of the filter installation.

GE j

s yM -

confirmed that such tests, using DOP and freon, u

will be run on the system's absolute and charcoal

[

filters.

They stated that the related detailed procedures would be forthcoming.

CO will follow-up to assure the adequacy of the procedures.

j s

f 8.

Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System CO stated that the test procedure was adequate for the system as presently described in the FDSAR; l

~

however, it was noted that this system was still I

being reviewed by DRL and that should system modifi-cations result, the test procedure would require re-vision,accordingly.

00 will follow up.

j l

__,___.l

, ~..

j EM u_

y(.a,.

.

  • V.

,,n

@y:

~

~p 3,, ?

4 9; >

o,

r[

.,3 4

n -

y, a

~

c:

a L

9.', Heating, Ventilatina and Air Conditioning System"

. ; y.

Co stated that in reviewing the test procedure.At m

'~'

was not clear whether.in-place efficiency tests' f

.' I would be run on the system's absolute and char-a coal filters.

GE said that the tests would be i

O run and that the related detailed procedures

^ n,

.o Vif would be forthcoming.

co will follow-up.

e i

l

~

10.

Standby Gas Treatment System

,o The test procedure has not yet been written..'GE-stated that it would be issued pending the com-pletion of discussions with DRL on secondary con-tainment leak rate testing.

GE confirmed that, regardless of the outcome of the-discussions, in-

~

l i

place efficiency tests, using. DOP and freon,.would. '; ;

be run on the system's absolute and charcoal filters. f CO will review the test procedure When available.

' J c.

.f

+

j 11.

125 volt Direct current system l

I The test procedure does.not include any capacity r

test of the batteries under design loa 4 conditions.

3

^

CO stated that some type of qualifying test is l, -

necessary to provide assurance that.the batteries

- W will perform as specified under accident or other i i)...

f:

emergency conditions.

GE said that this matter would be reviewed further.

CD will follow-up.

, "y M

ag.

12.

Radiation Monitoring Systems - Process. Area, Off Niaj{';

Gas, Stack and Environs.

f(( f ~

CO stated that the test procedures for the subject,y$ '

..M'f? y equipment were adequate with the exception that; g

they lacked detailed detector calibration pro-cedures.

JC said that detailed procedures would be*-6:!

provided and that they were.in the process of gw developing them with the assistance of GE. ~ CO will f f-review the calibration procedures When available.

jO

~

O

[

j 4 9

,.I

^

e 7.'

E i

-w j

-. ~,.

i

+%

aJL f l l_ ~ *f ;-

t-i 3 v

,yj 6-

. _.}

B.

Integrated Functional Testina GE-JC's preloading test program does not include an l

integrated hot functional test of the plant, the basis being.the same as that: stated in paragraph A. 1. - lack j

of, adequate heat source.

They do have scheduled a w

?

limited amount of integrated cold functional testings however, it is primarily incidental to the testing.of-

- e j

individual' systems.

CO stated that a more comprehensive and preplanned integratisd functional' test program,

?

especially including testing at elevated temperatures,

' i (as high as possible with the heat sources available),

is necessary to provide adequate assurance that the.

plant will function as described in the application.

GE-JC subsequently agreed to review the subject _further and to come up with some proposal that would consider 3

optimizing both the hot and cold efforts, giving con '

sideration miso to providing optimum training to JC f

operations personnel.

CO will follow-up.-

I l

C.

Initial Fuel Loading Plans CO stated that based on a review of the material made 1

.available, the fuel loading procedure was considered j

to be inadequate in its present form.

It was stated that a principal criterion used in the review was that l

the procedure be able to stand by itself; i.e.,

that it encompass all pertinent considerations relating to l

~

the fuel loading operations, such that adherence to the i

procedure, per se, would ensure' a safe approach to i

My initial criticality.

CO also stated that.it was ex-J l

pected that these operations would be conducted within the framework of the plant operating procedures and l

i the technical specifications,.and that, although both 1

GE and JC had previously stated that this would be done, it was not always apparent from the review.- CO stated

~

1 also that all preoperational tests that must be com--

pleted prior to loading. should be provided for in the j

procedure.

Subsequent discussion centered on these and other specific deficiencies noted by CO.

The discussions

)

were concluded with GE agreeing to review their loading procedure, giving consideration to the items h4ghlighted above, together with the following additional observa-tions:

e 9

s, "W

w a--

.,.y.,

m z.w.,

,_w..

y-wwg-9 i-

-rm-evr-4-T y-

p s,

.. bI

.* t

p (9

3 j

y l[ [

c. 3c a.

Additional emphasis is needed in the administrative.

f _1p

-p area, including an outline of the ground rules for the test program and specific references to per-w t

tinent supplementary documents and procedures.

i b.

Provisions for processing changes in the procedure j[

should be specified;

~

c.

Provisions for operator checkout on loading equip-

)

ment should be specified.

d.

A greater number of. shutdown margin demonstrations is considered necessary (GE proposed 5, originally)..

e.

Additional guidance should be provided for a mean-ingful interpretation of the count rate data.

~

f.

Instructions relating to nuclear instrumentation should specify how the instrumentation differs g

from that normally in use, and what the specific'

~

i scram set points should be.

'g.

Checks to be made regarding installation of the poison curtains should be specified.

r h.

Minimum staffing requirements, qualifications and limit on working hours should be specified.

1.

Health physics aspects require amplification.

}

g

?

D +~

J.

Specific equipment and systems requirements for the loading operations should be included.

k.

Design capability of applicable control rod drive:

following assembly of each fuel cell should be t

L demonstrated (discussed in paragraph A.1.).

f I

'f 1.

Minimum status of the containment system abould

[

be specified.

l

~

Inspection of each fuel' assembly prior to loading l

m.

should be accounted for.;

l 1

1 4

j

p g4..--

f

^

C.

}

L Iu f

.A 8.-

}

n.. Min'amso number of assemblies required for j

Y criticality should be specified.(stated by GE

}'

p:p b,e as follows:

unpoisoned core _- 10-assemblies't with poison curtains only - 20 assemblies).

..g

',t i

f I

CO will fo110w-41p on the areas high2'ighted above.

(

7 l R [

In this regard, it.was requested that they be apprised; j

k of any revisions to the loading procedure at the.

3

{

earliest opportunity; i.e., don't necessarily wait

..j!

l until final approvals.

e 4 >

.3 D.

Startup Test Program i

CO stated thaE insufficient material had been provided,

-l

~

thus far for a meaningful review, especially in the; areas of low power physics testing and power ascension '

l program.

It was stated that a preliminary review of what material had been provided indicated that it lacked detail similar to the loading procedure. - JC said that they themselves were just now reviewing this material.

l co stated that further review was required by them and that this would be done following JC's review.-

i E

E.

Formal Review of Programs and Procedures by'JC f

(y.

C0 stated that, from the reviews to date of the documenta' '-

tion relating to the pertinent subjects discussed during %(fi l

.l this meeting,_ lt was not possible to determine that this important material had received a formal safety review by:;4 i JC, nor was it apparent to what degree the results of the; j

A-various testing programs would be reviewed by them.? A-hjn !

clear resolution of this issue was not obtained during. 'a i

l The subject will be reviewed further by;4:

this meeting.

f }; f j 4f C0 during future contacts with the licensee.-

1 s:

1

  • b Y

[ l;g g,hhC cca J. P. O'Reilly, 00:B0 i

i.

a 4

19 f

l f

~

<o.

.a

- /-

3.;, rg

g.
  • s O...
v..

u.:L.'.l

. < - l.

.4,.**

,, 5 J

's e a

1

?

,,,m-,._.._.m

+

-e

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20087A099&oldid=4346442"