ML20148K839
| ML20148K839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 03/21/1988 |
| From: | Jape F, Scott Sparks NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148K824 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-88-07, 50-395-88-7, NUDOCS 8804010016 | |
| Download: ML20148K839 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000395/1988007
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
UNITED ST ATES
- [Sa Kf o'o,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
u
3 's
r'^
REGION 11
- I
h
' t
ATL AN T A. GEORGI A 30323
101 MARIETTA ST RE E T. N.W.
- '
\\...../
Report No.:
50-395/88-07
Licensee:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company
Columbia, SC 29218
Docket No.:
50-395
License No.:
facility Name:
Summer
Inspection Conducted:
Februe.ry 29 - March 4,1988
Inspector: b.h.Sn~M
S ~ M - O'O
5.E. Sparks {
Date Signed
Accompanying Personnel:
J. Zeiler
3 28 M
Approved by:
/f(/A4
v
F. Jape, Se6 tion ~ Chief
V
/
Date Signed
Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of review of
post-refueling startup tests, and review of local leak rate testing.
Results:
One violation was identified:
Failure to properly implement
procedures - Paragraph 5.d.
8804010016 880324
ADOCK 05000395
o
ecrat_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..
-
_ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
9
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licelisee Employees
L. Archie, Reactor Engineer
- M. D. Blue, Regulatory Compliance Engineer
- 0. S. Bradham, Director of Nuclear Plant Operations
- L. B. Collier, Maintenance /ISI-Welding
W. Haltiwanger, Senior Reactor Engineer
- W. R. Higgins, Supervisor, Regulatory Compliance
- 8. L. Johnson, Supervisor of Core Engineering
- A. R. Koon, Manager, Nuclear Licensing
- J. L. Skolds, General Manager of Operations
- 0. C. Warner, Manager of Core Engineering & Nuclear Computer Services
Other licensee employees contacted included, engineers, technicians,
operators, cechanics, and office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- R. Prevatte, Senior Resident Inspector
- P. Hopkins, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 4,1988, with
those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas
inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed below.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
The following new
item was identified during tnis inspection:
Violation, 395/88-07-01:
Failure To Properly Implement Procedures,
Paragraph 5.d.
The licensee did identify some material as proprietary during this
inspection, but this material is not included in this inspection report.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
Thissubjectwasnotaddressedintheinspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_ _ . _
_
_J
.
>
,
2
5.
Post-Refueling Startup Tests - Unit 1 (72700, 61708, 61710)
a.
REP-107.003, Beginning of Cycle Dilution to Criticality, Revision 1,
was begun on June 5, 1987, and completed on June 6, 1987.
Prior to pulling rods, both source range channels were tested for
operability using the chi-squared test.
The inspector independently
verified the analyses from the raw data.
Both systems were well
behaved.
The use of the chi-squared test confirms the detectors are
responding froportionally to neutrons, an assurance not obtained from
simply satisfying the operability surveillance required in the
Technical Specifications.
With an initial boron concentration of 2222 ppm, shutdown and then
control banks were withdrawn in 30 step increments until bank D was
at 160 steps.
The inverse count rate ratio (ICRR) was calculated for
each increment.
The final ICRR for source range channel 31 was
0.313.
The ICRR was renormalized to 1.0 and dilution was initiated
at a rate of approximately 100 gpm untit the ICRR reached 0.329 on
the source range.
At that
point, dilution was reduced to
approximately 50 gpm and cont nued until criticality was reached.
The logged critical configuration was 1734 ppmB in the Reactor
Coolant System (RCS) with bank D inserted to 118 steps to level off
the flux.
The critical configuration, when adjusted for the observed
critical bank D position, satisfies the acceptance criteria of plus
or minus 50 ppm 8 when compared with the expected critical boron
concentration.
The inspector expressed concern about the reactivity overshoot noted
during the ap3 roach to criticality.
It would appear prudent to stop
dilution earlier to allow criticality to occur during RCS mixing with
additional control rod adjustments as necessary.
This approach would
also reduce the anount of water processing required for the tests.
This consideration was discussed and acknowledged by the licensee at
the exit interview,
b.
STP-208.001, Shutdown and Control Rod Drop Test, was begun on June 3,
1987, and completed on June 4, 1987.
The inspector reviewed all drop times and recorder traces used in the
determination of drop times.
All drop times from initialization of
drop to dashpot entry were less than the Technical Specification
limit of 2.3 seconds,
c.
REP-107.008, Boron Endpoint Measurement, was begun on June 6, 1987,
and completed on June 6, 1987.
The inspector reviewed test results and strip chart recordings for
the licensee's test to determine the critical Reactor Coolant System
(RCS) boron concentration at hot zero power.
The measured value of
.
-
[
.
.
.
.
3
1830.6
apmB agreed well with the predicted value of 1799 ppmB,
satisfying the acceptance criteria of plus or minus 50 ppm 8.
d.
STP-210.002, Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement, was
begun on June 6, 1987, and ccmpleted on June 7, 1987.
The Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC) for 'he All Rods Out
(ARO) configuration was reported to be -3.73 pcm/ F for the cooldown
and -4.26 pcm/*F,
for the heatup.
The average ITC was corrected fcr
a Doppler Temperature Coefficient (0TC) of -2.29 pcm/*F, yielding a
Moderator Tempe9ture Coefficient (MTC) of -1.71 pcm/*F.
However,
the inspector determined that the licensee incorrectly scaled the
temperature changes during the cooldown and heatup, thereby
calculating an incorrect ITC, and thus an incorrect MTC.
Licensee
personnel involved with the test were interviewed and acknowledged
the error, and subsequently revised the calculation.
Correcting for
the error, the licensee calculated new ITCs for the cooldown and
heatup of -2.69 pcm/*F and -3.08 pcm/ F, respectively.
Considering
the DTC, the new MTC average was calculated to be -0.60 pcm/ F.
Although the new MTC conforms to the limit imposed by Technical Specification 3.1.1.3, the change is in a non-conservative direction.
Proper determination of MTC ensures that the coefficient remains
l
within the limiting condition assumed in the FSAR accident and
transient analyses.
The licensee
is required in Station
Administrative Procedure SAP-134, Control of Station Surveillance
Test Activities, Section 6.5.2.b, to perform a post-test review of
test results to determine programmatic and technical accuracy.
The
licensee failed to identify an error in the datermination of the MTC,
and thus performed an inadequate post-test review.
Failure to
properly implement procedure SAP-134 has been identified as a violation
against TS 6.8.1.c (VIO 395/88-07-01).
e.
REP-103.001, Control Rod Worth Measurement, was begun on June 6,
1987, and completed on June 7, 1987.
Control rod worths were determined by rod swap.
The reference bank
was bank B, which had a measured worth against boron dilution of 1354
pcm.
This value was 1.9% greater than the predicted bank D rod
worth.
The remaining bank worths were determintd by rod swap and
ranged from -2.7% to +1.4% more than predicted.
The total rod worth
was +0.01% less than predicted.
No additional violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Containment Local Leak Rate Program (61720)
a.
Documents Reviewed
GTP-007
"General Procedure for Valve / Penetration Leakage
-
Testing, Revision 4"
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
._ _ - ______
_ ___-__ _ _ _____ -____ _-
_-____ _ ____ ____ _ _____ - __ ______ ____ ______________
_
_
___
'
.
-
.
.
'
4
The procedure establishes the controls for tracking and summing
the individual Type B and C local leak rate tests to verify that
leakage is within the stated acceptance criteria.
,
STP-115.003
"Equipment Hatch Leak Rate Test"
-
4
STP-115.006
"Chemical and Volume Control System Valve Leakage
-
Test"
STP-115.114
"Instrument Air System Valve Leakage Test"
-
STP-115.116
"Component Cooling System Valve Leakage Test"
-
STP-115.118
"Sampling System Valve Testing Test"
-
STP-115.025
"Demineralization Water System Valve Leakage
-
,
Test"
,
'
STP-115.029
"Control Rod Drive Mechanism Cooling System Valve
-
Leakage Test"
b.
Scope of Review
1
The inspector reviewed the overall local leakage rate program to
]
verify that procedures have been developed and implemented consistent
with regulatory requirements.
The inspector reviewed the documents
listed above for technical adequacy and for cugihar.ct with the
-
1
regulatory requirements of Appendix J to 10 CfP. 50, the Technical
l
Specifications, and with applicable industry standards.
The
inspector also discussed the status of the current local leak rate
test program with the licensee's representative.
Included in the
discussions werc the documentation of test results, the repair and
retesting following failed tests, and the relationship of these items
to the "as-found" and "as-lef t" conditions as applied to Containment
Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) results.
c.
Findings
,
Based on the review of portions of the above procedures, the
inspector concluded that the licensee has developed and implemented
procedures which address the essential elements of the local leak
rate test regulatory requirements.
The licensee representatives
interviewed by the inspector appeared to be familidr with the use of
the procedures and knowledgeable with regulatory requirements.
The
inspector reviewed the local leak rate test results summary and
discussed analysis of test results with the licensee.
The inspector
was satisfied with the licensee's understanding of the application of
these results to the "as-found" condition of containment.
The
licensee acknowledged the application of these results the the
Technical Specification overall leakage limits and CILRT failure
criteria.
_
-
- _ _ _ _
-
,
.
.,
.
5
With no ongoing local leak rate testing being done at the time of the
inspection, the inspector discussed test operations with the
licensee's test personnel.
The licensee personnel interviewed
appeared familiar with test equipment and the use of test procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified.
l
l
1
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _