ML20235W038
| ML20235W038 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1987 |
| From: | Mark Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | James O'Reilly GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710150555 | |
| Download: ML20235W038 (5) | |
Text
Docket No.:
50-424
. & OCT c t
Mr. James P. O'Reilly 8 007 g',
Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
SUBJECT:
V0GTLE UNIT 1 INITIAL TEST PROGRAM By letters dated May 21, June 5, June 19 (2), September 4, and October 2, 1987, Georgia Power Company (GPC) described changes to the Vogtle Unit 1 Initial Test Program which were submitted in accordance with License Condition 2.C.(3).
Based on the information received, we have concluded that GPC should have conducted several tests prior to commercial operation as committed to in FSAR Section 14.2.1 and in accordance with NRC requirements.
Further, GPC should have infonned the staff of changes to its Initial Test Program prior to i
commercial operation. These tests, identified in the enclosure as items 1, 2, l
5, and 6, should be conducted as soon as practicable but not later than October J
31, 1987. We also have concluded that other changes to the Initial Test Program described in the referenced letters are acceptable, j
Sincerely, J5 ?
Melanie A. Miller, Project Manager Project Directorate II-3 l
Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File e PRC System Local PDR NRC PDR MMiller RRamirez REckenrode 8710150555 a71000 DR ADOCK 0500 4
BBuckley p
R. Gruel, PNL SVarga/Glainas
,Q ACRS(10) m,g 6
MD>ncan O
,f PD I,-
i'RFf/II P
/II PDII-/3'/ RPI/II h.
'{,i t > Tie / rad M ncan KJabbour 3d
/0 ;
'g 7 10
/87 10///87 10/'y/87
g-
~ ~ " ' " ~ ~ ~ '
c------
[
my
~= $
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
[..(
7,j -
,, WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
,o -
R****J
,@ QCT R
L Docket; no'. :
50-424-Mr./JamesP. O'Reilly.
Scnior Vice President - Nuclear Operations l
Georgia Power Company.
P.O. Box 4545' LAtlanta,: Georgia' 30302
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
1
SUBJECT:
V0GTLE UNIT 1 INITIAL TEST PROGRAM By letters dated May 21, June 5, June 19 (2), September 4, and October 2,1987,.
- Georgia Power Company (GPC). described. changes to'the Vogtle Unit.1 Initial LTest Program which were submitted in accordance with License Condition 2.C.(3).
Based on the infonnation received, we have concluded that GPC should have conducted several tests prior to commercial operation as committed to in FSAR Section 14.2.1 and in accordance with NRC requirements.
Further, GPC should have informed the staff of changes to its Initial Test Program prior to commercial - opera tion.- These. tests, identified in the enclosure as items 1, 2,
' 5, and 6,'should be conducted as soon as practicable but not later than October 31,11987.' We also have concluded that other changes to the Initial Test Program described in the~ referenced letters are acceptable.
j Sincerely, m[z{ pa G. )lu-07Lv
)
nelanie A. Miller, Project Manager J
Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II j
Enclo:vre:
As statea cc; 'See next pace
f,,"
l.
p
~ ENCLOSURE 1 SUPPLEMENTAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT
)
V0GTLE UNIT 1 j
- L DOCKET NO. 50-424 i
]
114.21 Initial Test Program 1
{
-In'the SER-dated June 1985,,we concluded that the. applicant's (now licensee) initial test program was acceptable.
In SSER 5 dated. January 1987, the. staff j
concluded that certain. changes to the initial test program were acceptable.-
i Since that SSER, the licensee has made further changes to.the Vogtle Unit 1 Initial Test Program described in letters dated May 21 June 5, June 19 (2),-
September-4, and October 2, 1987 which were submitted in accordance with License
}
Condition 2.C.(3).;
By letter dated May 21, 1987, the licensee has modified the Process and Effluent Radiation Monitoring System Test (FSAR Section 14.2.8.2.28) to specifically' address those monitors which either perfonn safety-related functions or provide safety-related diagnostic indications. Because the substance'of this test has not changed, the staff finds this modification acceptable.
The remainder of the changes in the May 21, 1987 letter as well.as the changes discussed in the June 5 letter and both June 19 letters are minor in nature and acceptable to the staff.
The changes to the initial test program discussed in the September 4 and 0ctober 2.submittals are each addressed below.
1.
Section 14.2.8.2.25, Automatic Steam Generator Level Control Test By letter dated.0ctober 2,1987, the licensee has 'stateo that #urther testino of the autcmatic steam generator level control system, in accition to that demonstrated during'various transients conducted at.30% ano 75% oower, is not planned. However, the staff requires that the automatic steam generator levei control test be conducted during the load swing test at 100% cercent ocwer (see Item 2 below) in accordance with Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.68, Aopenoix A.5.s.
i 2.
Section 14.:'.E.2.27. Leao Swina Test I
RG 1.68, Appenoix A.5.h.h provides an acceptable acproacn for ecch facility to
-demonstrate that "the dynamic response of the plant to the design load swings for the facility... is in accoroance with design."
In FSAR Sections 14.2.3.2.27, lead Swing Test, and 14.2.1, the licensee adeauately describec ana corr.itted to j
perform such tests prior to commercial operation.
By letter cated Octcber 2, 10F37, the. licensee has deleted the load swing frcm '.00! co',,er tatt.
We i,
_;J y;-
/
i V
p
~f
-?-
staff finds no. basis for deletion' of this test.
This test provides an acceptable approach for demonstrating' the acceptable plant response in accordance with RG l.' 68, Appendix A.5.h.h 'and further was used as a basis by
- the staff to allow the. licensee exemption from demonstrating acceptable plant i
response 1to the most severe credible feedwater temperature reduction in accordance with RG 1.68, Appendix A.5.k.k (FSAR Section.1.9.68.2).
staff's position that the-licensee ' conduct a -10% load swing from 100 It is the test and a subsequent.+10% load swing test from 90% power as soon as % power practicable but not later than October 31, 1987,.in accordance with FSAR Sections,1.9.'68.2 and 14.2.8.2.27 and RG 1.68, Appendix A.5.h.h and A.5.k k
- 3...Section 14'2.8.2.52 Large Load Reduction Test
'FSAR Section 14.2.12.2.18,
-reductions-from various power levels.Large Load Reduction Test, describes 50% loao licensee has deleted the.50% load. reduction from 100% power test.By letter da j
therefore, the staff finds this acceptable. load reduction test from full p The 50%
4
(
~
~
i 4
Section 14.2.8.2.54, Steam Generator Moisture Carryover Test By. letter dated September 4,1987, the licensee has stated that the referenced test cannot be' completed without placing the secondary plant polishing system out of service for twelve hourc, which the secondary plant chemistry is unable to support at this time. _ The steam generator moisture carryover test is not a
- the initial test program.specifically required test and therefore does not have to The staff finds modification of this test acceptable.
5 Section 14.2.8.2 48, Thermal Exoansion Test
.By letter dated October 2,1987, the licensee has deferred the verification
. cold position until entering cold shutdown on Octoberthat during cco planned maintenance outage. Although this test could have been performed 12, 1987, as cart of the during conduct of the Remote Shutdown Precoeraticnal Test (FSAR Section 14.2.8.1.105) 1 cerforned during the initial plant test program, deferrai of
.I this portion of the test does not imcact the health and safety of-the puolic i
The staff finds this charge acceptable.
(
6.'
Secticn 14.2.8.2.43, Dynamic Resoonse Test
)
of main' steam system piping cynamic' response to the rao1
{
j turbine stop valves from 100% power.
In its Octcber 2,1987, letter, 1
j
___._.C'_
. j or,e' L~ c
_3 I
the~ licensee indicate'd that'it plans to conduct this verification during a plant trip from full. power on October 9,1987, to be conducted in conjunction with the planned maintenance outage.
Although this test could have been performed during conduct of the Plant Trip from 100% Power Test (FSAR Section 14.2.8.2.53) performed during. the initial plant test program, deferral of this test does not impact the health and safety of the-.public.
The staff finds this change acceptable.
7 Section 14.2.8.2.50, Power Ascension Test Secuence By letters dated September 4 and October 2,1987, the licensee has deferred completion-of the power ascen,sion test sequence documentation pending completion of the power ascension testing.
resolution of'the items in this evaluation.This is acceptable to the staff contingent upon 8
Section'14.2.8.2.55, Plant Performance Test By letter dated October 2, 1987, the licensee stated that adjustments will continue to be made to plant systems to improve plant efficiency-but that no further testing as part of the power ascension test program is planned.
Continued conduct of this test does not impact the health and safety of the public, and the staff. finds this change acceptable.
The' tests identified in Items 1, 2, 5, and 6 should be conducted as soon as
[
practicable but not later than October 31, 1987.
f
(
i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.