ML20154K785
| ML20154K785 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1986 |
| From: | Burnett P, Jape F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154K398 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-416-86-01, 50-416-86-1, TAC-57520, NUDOCS 8603110312 | |
| Download: ML20154K785 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000416/1986001
Text
d. Kid
UNITED STATES
. /
'o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
REGION ll
,
j
,j
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
2
AT L ANTA, GEORGI A 30323
%+...+/
Report No.:
50-416/86-01
Licensee: Mississippi Power and Light Company
Jackson, MS 39205
Docket No.:
50-416
License No.:
Facility Name: Grand Gulf
Inspection Conducted: January 27-31, 1986
P.7. BI;rneft ~ am
c2f]/fd
.
Inspectort.
Date Signed
A
'
b
Approved by:
F. Jape, Section Chief
V F
Date Signed
Engineering Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 31 inspector-hours on site
inspecting the initial startup test program.
Results:
One violation was identified - Failure to update the Final Safety
Analysis Report
paragraph 5.m.
.
.
~
--
.
8603110312 B60
16
ADOCK O
Q
.
-
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- J.
E. Cross,-Site Director
- C. R. Hutchinson, General Manager
- R. F. Rogers, Assistant to the General Manager
- D. Cupstid, Technical Support Superintendent
- L. F. Daughtery, Compliance Superintendent
G. H. Davant, Startup Supervisor
'Other licensee employees contacted included engineers office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- R. C. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector
J. L. Caldwell, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit' Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 31, 1986, with
those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the
areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.
No
dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not
identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the
,
inspector during this inspection. The following items were identified:
VIO 416/86-01-01:
Failure to update the Final Safety Analysis Report in a
timely manner, paragraph 5.m.
,
I
UNR 416/86-01-02:
Review test exceptions to level
1 startup test
acceptance for 10 CFR 50.59 considerations, paragraph 6.
IFI 416/86-01-03:
Inspect test results for rod sequence exchange at power,
parsgraph 6.
.
IFI 416/86-01-04:
Inspect test results for fuel pool cooling using FPC
heat exchangers, paragraph 6.
I
IFI 416/86-01-05:
Inspect test results for RHR steam condensing mode,
paragraph 6.
,
,
IFI 416/86-01-06:
Inspect test results for floor drain evaporator
j
performance and heat load, paragraph 6.
!
- - . - . .
. _ - . . - - - - - _ - -
.-
- . - .
-
-.
-
.
2
IFI 416/86-01-07:
Inspect test results for the chemical waste evaporator
performance and heat load, paragraph 6.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to
determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or devia-
tions. One unresolved item 416/86-01-02, identified during this inspection
is discussed in paragraph 6.
5.
The following completed startup tests, performed in test condition 6, were
reviewed to assure that the results had been reviewed and accepted by plant
management, that the acceptance criteria had been satisfied, and that all
test exceptions had been resolved:
a.
1-C11-SU-05-6 (Revision 1), Control Rod Drive System, was performed in
conjunction with surveillance procedure 06-RE-SC11-V-0402 (Revi sion
24).
Scram time tests were performed during scrams following MSIV
closure at 75% rated thermal power (RTP) and following loss of
generator load test.
On both occasions, all rods met the most
stringent criterion for drop time.
The results were submitted by the
test engineer on July 25, 1985, and the results were accepted by the
plant manager on August 28, 1985.
b.
1-C51-SU-11-6 (Revision 1), Local Power Range Monitor Calibration, was
performed in conjunction with surveillance test 06-RE-1C51-0-0001. The
results submitted on June 5,
1985, and the results accepted on
September 26, 1985.
c.
1-C51-SU-12-6 (Revision 2), Average Power Range Monitor Calibration,
was submitted on May 13, 1985, and the results accepted on July 9,
1985.
d.
1-C91-SU-13-6 (Revision 1), Process Computer, was submitted on
September 10,1985, and the results accepted on November 11, 1985,
e.
1-821-SU-16-6 (Revision 2), Selected Process Temperatures and Water
Level Measurenents, was submitted on September 3, 1985, and the results
accepted on October 3, 1985.
f.
1-000-SU-18-6 (Revision 2), Core Power Distribution, was submitted on
July 23, 1985, and the results accepted on August 29, 1985.
g.
1-000-Sb-19-6 (Revision 1), Core Performance, was submitted on May 15,
1985, and the results accepted on July 17, 1985.
~
.
3
h.
1-N32-SU-22-6 (Revision 2), Initial Pressure Controller, was submitted
on July 29, 1985, and the results accepted on October 14, 1985.
i.
1-000-SU-24-6 (Revision 1), Turbine Valve Surveillance, was submitted
on August 15, 1985, and the results were accepted on October 22, 1985.
j.
1-B21-SU-25-6 (Revision 2), Main Steam Isolation Valves, was submitted
on September 28, 1985, and the results were accepted on October 14,
1985.
The upper power limit for MSIV closure without scram was
determined to be that at which earlier tests were performed. Hence, no
additional individual valve closure time tests were performed.
k.
1-000-SU-27-6 (Revision 1), Generator Load Rejection, was submitted on
July 12, 1985, and the results were acceptad on Septembsr 26, 1985.
Test exception FP-45 is still open because the feedwater pumps tripped
at level 8.
,
1.
1-833-SU-29-6 (Revisten 2), Recirculation Flow Control System, was
submitted on December 10, 1985, and the results accepted on January 4,
1986. All requirements to test the automatic load following features
have been deleted, and the capability to use automatic load following
has been permanently defeated.
m.
1-833-SU-30-6 (Revision 2), Reactor Recirculation System, was submitted
on September 12, 1985, and the results accepted on January 8, 19E5.
Test exception FP-95 was taken to this test. The exception documents a
failure to satisfy a level 1 acceptance criterion, resulting from a too
rapid coastdown of the recirculation pumps following a trip.
The
acceptance criterion requires that the coast down flow curve stay
within the bounds of curves based upon 5 second and 4 second inertial
time constants as presented in FSAR Figure 14.2-6.
An analysis by
General Electric (GE) Cc: pany showed that the test results were bounded
by a pump curve with an inertial time constant of 3 seconds. GE also
determined that the f aste
coastdown would result in an increase in
peak cladding temperature (PCT) of 10
F during a loss of coolant
accident (LOCA).
The coastdown problem had first been identified
during test condition 3 testing.
The NRC (NRR) had reviewed the test
results and additional analyses at that time, and, in a letter dated
April 29, 1985, had pronounced them acceptable.
However, the updated FSAR issued on December 1, 1985, which should have
been up-to-date through June 1,1985, did not reflect the results of
that approved analysis it. three instances:
(1) Table 6.3-3 did not include a revised value of peak clad
temperature following a LOCA.
The analysis provided by the
licensee had shown that peak clad temperature would increase by
less than 10 F.
,
4
(2) Table 15.0-2 was not revised to show that the pump inertial time
constant used in analysis was 3 seconds, and not the 5 seconds
used previously.
(3) Table 15.0-3 was not revised to show that the pump inertial time
constant used in analysis was 3 seconds, and not the 5 seconds
used previously.
The above have been identified as a single apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.71.e (VIO:416/86-01-01: Failure to update the Final Safety Analysis
Report in a timely manner).
n.
1-B33-SU-35-6 (Revision 1), Recirculation System Flow Calibration, was
submitted on August 13, 1985, and the results accepted on September 26,
1985.
o.
1-E12-SU-71-6 (Revision 1), Residual Heat Removal System, was submitted
on September 9, 1985, and the results were accepted on September 26,
1985. The steam condensing mode of operation was not tested.
That
phase of the test had been defined as non-essential, hence, performance
was not required. However, the test must be performed prior to using
that mode of cooling.
The licensee's schedule is currently indeter-
minate.
p.
1-N64-SU-74-6
(Revision
1),
Offgas
System,
was
submitted
on
September 20, 1985, and the results were accepted on October 3, 1985.
q.
1-000-SU-75' -6 ( Revi sion 2), Cooling Water System, was submitted on
September 27, 1985, and accepted on October 22, 1985.
The fuel pool
heat exchangers were not tested, nor placed into service. They must be
tested before being used.
r.
1-000-SU-76-6 (Revision 2), Engineered Safety Features Equipment Area
,
i
Cooling, was submitted on October 15, 1985, and the results were
accepted on October 22, 1985.
s.
1-000-SU-79-6 (Revision 2), Penetration Cooling, was submitted on
May 20, 1985, and accepted on July 9, 1985.
6.
Followup Action on Startup Tests (72532)
It appears that some test exceptions to level 1 acceptance criteria were
resolved by re-describing the plant within bounds defined in the FSAR
Chapter 14 test descriptions.
Test SU-17-6, System Expansion, is an
example. Although the test acceptance criteria were thus satisfied, it is
not clear that the changes in plant description were then reviewed in the
broader context required by 10 CFR 50.59. This question will be tracked as
an unresolved item (UNR 416/86-01-02:
Review test exceptions to level 1
startup test acceptance for 10 CFR 50.59 considerations). The licensee has
committed to complete the review by February 28, 1986.
- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
--
..
5
Several tests of systems or subsystems were deferred as non-essential.
However, testing is required before these systems or subsystems are placed
into service.
To assure that the tests are inspected once performed, the
following inspector followup items, requiring no action on the part of the
licensee, are created for tracking purposes:
IFI (416/86-01-03):
Inspect test results for rod sequence exchange at
power.
IFI (416/86-01-04):
Inspect test results for fuel pool cooling using
FPC heat exchangers.
IFI (416/86-01-05):
Inspect test results for RHR steam condensing
mode.
IFI (416/86-01-06):
Inspect test results for floor drain evaporator
performance and heat load.
~
IFI (416/86-01-07):
Inspect test results for the chemical waste
evaporator performance and heat load.
7.
, Followup of Inspector Identified Items (92701)
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 416/85-29-01: Complete a draft revision of
FSAR figure 14.2-4 to more accurately portray observed performance in
natural and low-flow forced circulation.
The licensee produced an accept-
able draft'by August 30, 1985.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 416/85-29-04: Evaluate base crit codes on
LPRMs experienced in test condition 4.
The licensee. provided an adequate
and instruction evaluation on August 30, 1985.
.-
.-
.