ML20246D564
| ML20246D564 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1989 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Hunger G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246D568 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908280189 | |
| Download: ML20246D564 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000353/1989201
Text
_
_ _ _
_
__-
-- - - ---
.
hh [h
M*
ro,
. UNITED STATES
%,[
4
g.?
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
gg
-
.
wasHsuciou,o c.nosss '
. . . . -
m
Dbckht Nui 50-353:
I
' Mr.f George' A'.! Hunger, Jr.
Director-Licensing
> ATTN:~ Correspondence Control Desk:
Philadelphia Electric Company
2301 Market Street
' Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19101'
(Dear Mr. Hunger:
.
> SUBJECT:- CORRECTIVE ACTION INSPECTION OF THE INDEPENDENT DESIGN
ASSESSMENT AT t.IMERICK GENERATING STATION UNIT 2 REPORT
50-353/89-201:
i
As part of, its plan. to monitor Philadelphia. Electric Company's-(PECO's) " Program
. for the Independent Design and Construction Assessment (IDCA) of. Limerick Unit 2 "
the hRC staff conducted 6. corrective action inspection of the' independent design
~
assessment (IDA). . This inspection took place at the offices of the architect-
engineer, Bechtel Power Corporation, located in San Francisco, California, during
the week of April 24, 1989. The exit meeting was held on April 28, 1989..
1
"
- The purpose of this inspection was to assess.the validity of the design assessment.
report issued by the independent contractor, Stone and Webster Engineering Company
(SWEC), on April 112,1989. -The inspection team's approach included a ruiew of 64 -
. selected design observation reports .(DORS) to ensure that each issue identified
had received an appropriate response by the architect-engineer and that a proper.
. evaluttion of each response had been performed by the independent contractor. Also,
the inspection team: verified that the corrective actions resulting from the design-
observation. reports had been performed or were scheduled to be completed by PECO.'
.j
- The inspection team was satisfied with the methods, quality and comprehensive-
- ness of the IDA and concluded-that the IDA provided the needed additional'
- assurance that the design of Limerick Unit 2 met its licer. sing commitments.
i
This conclusion was based on the NRC's multi-inspection overview of the IDA'
3
sl program,- the independent contractor's similar conclusion, and commitments from -
l
- PECO which were occumented in letters to the NRC dated M&y 16 and May 25, 1989'
i
As a result of the inspection team's review, PECO has connitted to perform the
-l
-
u,
(following. .
- (1) Evaluation of. the effect of- grid voltage swing to ensure that spuricus
l
separation of. the onsite sufety-related buses from the grid does not
occur for the conditions defined in the inspection report (See DDR 103).
(2) Evaluation of the sizing of the thennal overload relay heaters for
safe-shutdownapplications(Seed 0R039).
(3) Evaluation of.the vital battery end-of-life capacity considering a
'
nondetectable high impedance fault on the ac side of the inverter
,
(
(See DDR 087).
i
g
8908280189 890823
(
ADOCK 05000353 h
.
1
O
PNU g
._-_.
.
>
.
'
'
Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr.
-2-
AUG 231989
PECO has connitted to complete the aforementioned activities before exceeding
5 percent power for items (1) and (2), and before loading fuel for item (3). For
these three items, PECO is requested to respond in writing within 60 days describing
the details of their evaluation, the conclusions, and the associated corrective
actions, if any.
Additionally, the Hazards Program Evaluation Supplement which was distributed
on May 17, 1989, was reviewed and found acceptable by the staff, and no associated
inspection is planned.
If you have any questions, please contact me or the IDCA coordinator, Gene Imbro,
at (301) 497-0954.
Sincerely.
Oricinal signed by
Steven A. Varga, Director
Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
Executive Summary
2.
Inspection Report 50-353/89-201
cc w/ enclosures:
See next page
i
i
i
i
l
l
1
SEE PREVIOUS C0t;CURRENCE
!
-
tb >
'![I...:$I[IIIIIIIII$___!$![IIII[IiIIIl$IIIII$!!!III.lI[$1INI$.!M5NM.I[.l.............
- NAME
- CRWParkhill:jj
- EVInibro
- WDLanning
- JAZw
ki
I......:. ..............:..............:..............:.... g .... -:.... 7 -- ...:.. ........ .
.
__ _ _ _
. , W4 p
- (
'
4
--
.'
.;'.
q;, .
'
-
, . , .
'Mr. Gedrge A. Hunger, Jr.
~
3-
-
.
) distribution:-
1;3pctet me 50;353"4 -
RSIB R/F" " "'"
DRIS R/F
RWParkhill
EVImbro ..-
'WDLanning.
. BKGrimes
SAVarga
TMurley
JSniezek.
RSpessard
FMiraglia
-R. Clark
W. Butler
J..Durr, RI
.
'
J. Strosnider, RI
E..Wenzinger, RI
.
Regional-Administrators.
Regional Division Directors
Inspection Team
LPDR-
ACRS(3)
OGC (3)
IS Distribution
1'
l
f-
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.____ _____ _____-_.__.. ____________ _________ _
_________._.____________._____u
_
_
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
,
e
Mr. Geo'rge A. Hunger, Jr.
Limerick Generating Station
,
. Philadelphia ' Electric Company
Units 1 & 2
i
\\
)
cc:
Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esquire
Mr. Ted Ullrich
'
Conner and Wetterhahn
Manager - Unit 2 Startup
1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Limerick Generating Station
i
Washington, D.C.
20006
P.O. Box A
Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464
I
Mr, Rod Krich 57-1
Mr. John Doering
J
Philadelphia Electric Company
Superintendent-0perations
I
2301 Market Street
Limerick Generating Station
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101-
P.O. Box A
'
Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19404
I
Mr. David Hcnan N2-1
Thomas Gerusky, Director
'
Philadelphia Electric Company
Bureau of Radiation Protection
2301 Market Street
PA Dept. of Environmental Resources
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101
P. O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120
Mr. Graham M. Leitch, Vice President
Single Point of Contact
Limerick Ger erating Station
P. O. Box 11880
Post Office Box A
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1060
Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464
Mr. James Linville
Mr. Philip J. Duca
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Superintendent-Technical
Region 1
Limerick Generating Station
475 Allendale Road
P. O. Box A
King of Prussia, PA 19406
Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464
<
Mr. Thomas Kenny
Senior Resident Inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.
P. O. Box 596
l
Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464
Mr. Joseph W. Gallagher
Vice President, Nuclear Services
,
Philadelphia Electric Company
i
2301 Market Street
Philadelphia, Penrisylvania 19101
i
Mr. John S. Kemper
Senior Vice President-Nucler,r
Philadelphia Electric Compr.ny
i
2301 Market Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvan',a 19101
0
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _
,'
. 1
e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
'
'
,
'
INSPECTION REPORT 50-353/89-201
LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNIT 2
The NRC inspection team has monitored each of thu .iesign and construction
aspects of the Limerick independent design and construction assessment (IDCA)
in three phases:
(1) preparation of review plans, (2) implementation of the
review plans and performance of the review, and (3) evaluation of the final
'
IDCA report, including assessment of the corrective actions. This inspection
was the third phase of the independent design assessment (IDA) and was con-
ducted at the offices of the architect-engineer, Cechtel Power Corporation,
located in San Francisco, California.
The inspection tean, assessed the validity of the design assessment report by
reviewing 64 of the 118 design observation reports (DORS). The review focused
on the appropriateness of the Bechtel response to Stone and Webster Engineering
Company (SWEC) findings as well as the appropriateness of SWEC's evaluation of
Etetel's response. Additionally, the inspection team reviewed implementation of
'M
associated corrective actions.
Of the 118 design observation reports, Bechtel and SWEC could not agree on
resolution of 6 of these items. The inspection team reviewed these items,
which are sucmarized below:
For D0R 015 regarding the generic qualification of a radiation shielding
program, for D0R 043 regarding use of a exponential temperature decay
1or piping thermal analysis, and for DDR 097 regarding heat loads
for control room cooling under emergency conditions, the inspection
team decided that no additional action was necessary to resolve
the iswes identified, and these items are censidered closed.
DOR 039 questioned the validity of not including heater tolerances
and minimum operating voltages in the sizing of motor thermal
overload relay heaters. The inspection team concurred with the
finding and requested PECO to evaluate the sizing of thermal
overload relay heaters, includirg the effects of low voltage, high
ambient temperatures, and negative tolerances for all continuously
running 480-volt motors required for safe shutdown. PEC0's letter of
May 16, 1989, committed to perfonn this evaluation before exceeding
5 percent power.
DDR 103 requested that the grid swing minimum voltages be analyzed to
confirm that spurious separation of the onsite safety-related buses
from the grid would not occur. The inspection team concurred with the
finding and defined the condition to be analyzed as a single source of
offsite power supplying both units, the load tap changer at its most
unfavorable position before the event, a loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA)
in one unit and safe shutdown in the other unit, and a dip in the grid
voltage as a result of a loss of another offsite unit when the voltage
on the grid was at a normal minimum value. PECO's letter of May 16,
1989 connitted to revise the voltage regulation study for a grid voltage
swing evaluation before exceeding 5 percent power, and the staff expects
the aforementioned scenario to be completely reviewed.
EE ?
.
_ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
,
.
DdR 113. questioned the design of the diesel generator ground fault
'
-
annunciation. The inspection team agreed that the current design does
not violate any licensing commitment or regulatory requirement. However,
the inspection team viewed this as a poor design practice because it was
not consistent with standard industry practice, it increased the risk of
a fire, and the associated annunciator circuit would be unreliable subse-
quent to a LOCA. PECO should re-evaluate the sizing of the associated
diesel generator ground fault resistor, considering the aforementioned
shortcomings of the present design.
In addition to the 6 open items identified by SWEC, the inspection team
reviewed on a sampling basis 58 other DORS and was generally well satisfied
with their resolution. As a result of the inspection team's review, two items
were discussed at the exit meeting which required PECO action and are discussed
below:
D0R 021 identified that no formally issued procedure existed for the
performance of balance-of-plant safety-related instrument setpoint
calculations. As a result of this finding, the inspection team
identified related issues which were adequately addressed in PECO's letter
dated Merch 25, 1989, and resulted in the need for a final safety
analysis report (FSAR) change and revision to instrument setpoint data
sheets for increased process tolerance. Based on PEC0's response, this
item is closed.
DDR 087 verified ti:at the vital battery had sufficient end-of-life
(E0L) margin. However, the inspection team identified that the
effect of a high impedance fault on the discharge of the inverter
was not considered in the EOL margin evaluation. PECO committed
in its letter dated May 16, 1989, to perform the associated calculat on
d
before fuel load.
The inspection team concluded that the SWEC IDA review was thorough, and the
results provide additional assurance regarding the adequacy of the Limerick
Unit 2 design process.
I