IR 05000443/1986001

Insp Rept 50-443/86-01 on 860106-10.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Preoperational Test Program,Including Review of Test Procedures,Evaluation of Results of Completed Tests & Test Program Review

ML20140E888
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	01/28/1986
From:	Briggs L, Eselgroth P, Nicholas H, Van Kessel H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20140E873	List: IR 05000443/1986001 ML20140E869
References
50-443-86-01, 50-443-86-1, NUDOCS 8602040115
Download: ML20140E888 (9)

Text

.- _ _ . ..

. .

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /86-01 Docket N License N CPPR-135 Priority -

Category B Licensee: Public Service of New Hampshire P. O. Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Facility Name: Seabrook Station, Unit 1

.

'

-Inspection At: Seabrook, New Hampshire Inspection Conducted: January 6-10, 1986 Inspectors: k b #

H. F. van Kessel, Reactor Engineer date 41tf 5 h E 46 / M/8d>

L. Ig/ggs, Lead M actor Inspector

'

date

/ 2-

. H. Nic as, Startup Consultant ' date Approved by: / / 21 M -

P. sel h, Chief, Test Programs / date Section B, DRS Inspection Summary:

Inspection on January 6-10, 1986 (Inspection No. 50-443/86-01)

Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of the Preoperational Test Program including the review of preoperational test procedures, the evaluation of the test results of completed tests, test program review, independent verification, review of activities in QA/QC interface for POT program, and Plant Tours. The inspection covered 86 manhours onsite by two region-based inspectors and one NRC engineering consultan Results: No violations were identifie e60129 PDR ADOCK 05000443 O PDR

, .

1.0 Persons Contacted

• J. Azzopardi, Quality Assurance Engineer (NHY)

• R. Jaquette, Licensing Engineer (YAEC)

• A. Kam, Phase 2-6 Test Group Manager (NHY)

• C. Lambert, Project Field QC Manager (UE&C)

• F. Lynch, Startup QA (YAEC)

• McLain, Startup Manager (NHY)

• D.W. Perkins, Quality Assurance Engineer (YAEC)

• L. Rau, Reactor Startup Supervisor (NHY)

• J. W. Singleton, Assistant QA Manager (YAEC)

• J. G. Tefft, STD - Special Assistant (NHY)

• D. F. Turner, Quality Assurance Engineer (YAEC)

T. Waechter, Startup Test Engineer (NHY)

Other NRC Personnel Present

• R. Barkley, Reactor Engineer

• A. Cerne, Senior Resident Inspector

• D. Ruscitto, Resident Inspector

• Denotes those present at January 10, 1986 exit meetin .0 Followup of Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved Item (443/85-02-01), licensee to revise 1-PT-27.1, " Fuel Storage Building Ventilation" and 1-AT-31, " Seismic Monitoring" to require attachment of General Tests (GT-M-03 and GT-I-111) used to satisfy FSAR Chapter 14 commitments. The licensee stated that the above revision would be accomplished during the final procedure review just prior to performance of the test procedure. This item remains open pending procedure revision and subsequent NRC revie (0 pen) Unresolved Item (443/85-12-02), " Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG)

Testing Scope." This item concerned ECCS load sequencing onto the EDG immediately following the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> full load run. This item was dis-

, cussed in detail in Paragraph 2 of Inspection Report No. 50-443/85-21, 1-PT(I)-39.1, Loss of Offsite Power Test, during which this item will be tested, had not, at the conclusion of this inspection, been reviewed and approved by the Joint Test Group (JTG). This item remains open pending NRC review of 1-PT(I)-39.1 after final licensee approva (0 pen) Unresolved Item (443/85-26-02), licensee to perform engineering evaluation of the service water system to determine if operating restric-tions must be imposed on the cooling towers (ultimate heat sink). The licensee stated that the evaluation was in progress but not yet complet It was also noted that preliminary indications, based on hot functional test results, were that no operating restrictions would be required. This item remains open pending completion of the engineering evaluation and subsequent NRC revie _ . . . __ _

_ . . .

. _ _ - . --

_

I

, .

J

3.0 Preoperational Test (POT) Program 3.1 POT Program Review References i (1) Startup Manual (2) FSAR, Chapter 14 (3) Regulatory Guide 1.68, Revision 2, " Initial Test Programs for Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants" (4) NRC Inspection Report No. 50-443/83-16, issued November 15, 1983 i

Scope A review of the preoperational test program was conducted to verify adherence to the requirements and commitments of documents (2) and (3) referenced above.

'

Discussion A general review was made of the administrative procedures, Test

Program Instructions (TPIs), which are a part of the Startup Manual. These TPIs were compared with the commitments made in the FSAR, Chapter 14 (Ref. 2) and the requirements of the Regulatory Guide 1.68 (Ref. 3) to verify that the administrative measures have been established to control the conduct of preoperational testing including:

(1) Preoperational Test Program description;

,

(2) A method to control turnover of systems from the constructor to I

the Startup department (STO) and, subsequently, from STD to the i

operations department; i

(3) Preoperational Tests for the plant systems listed in Regulatory Guide 1.68; I (4) A formal method to control preoperational test procedure format, content, review and approval, and changes to procedures;

,

(5) A formal method to control interruption of testing and retest l

requirements; i

l (6) A formal method to control calibration and issuance of measuring l and test equipment; and i

(7) A method to control lifted lead, jumpers and safety tagging.

i

.-

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

.

.

! 4

l In view of the status of the preoperational testing (post HFT),

special attention was paid to items 4 and 5. The following areas of concern resulted from the review of these items: Retesting for phase 1 and 3 POTS. Who decides whether the retest will be a phase 1, 2 or 3 test? Retest records review and approval, Retest record retention and retrieva Prioritization of incomplete items by startup mileston These areas of concern were discussed with the licensee. With reference to a.above, the Joint Test Group (JTG) will review and approve the retest procedure selected by the responsible startup engineer, who will base his selection on the impact which the test

<

deficiency had on the preoperational tes With reference to b.and c.above, retest records will be reviewed and approved by the JTG. These test records will be added to the test package for the pertinent completed tes With reference to d.above, the licensee indicated that some prioritization has been done alread In view of the small number of incomplete items generated to date, prioritization is not con-sidered to be a significant problem.

t Findings Within the scope of this inspection, no violations were observe .2 Preoperational and Acceptance Test Results Evaluation Review Scope The completed test procedures listed in Attachment A were reviewed during this inspection to verify that adequate testing had been conducted to satisfy regulatory guidance, licensee commitments and FSAR requirements and to verify that uniform criteria are being applied for evaluation of completed test results in order to assure technical and administrative adequac The inspector reviewed the test results and verified the licensee's evaluation of test results by review of test changes, test exceptions, test deficiencies, "As-Run" copy of test procedure, acceptance

!

criteria, performance verification, recording conduct of test, QC inspection records, restoration of system to normal after test, independent verification of critical steps or parameters, identifi-cation of personnel conducting and evaluating test data, and verification that the test results have been approve . . _-_ _ . .

- .. - -

._

.

Discussion

• PT(I)-9, Revision 2, "ECCS HOT Functional Test." Check valve leakage for many valves initially was found to be in excess of the acceptable values shown in the procedure. Additional flush-ing and cleaning of the associated piping brought these leakages back within the acceptable values. The basis for the acceptance criteria, as shown in the procedure, was not provided in sam The licensee stated that the numbers in the procedure are based

.on 10 cc/hr per inch of nominal pipe diameter. The source of this number was not known nor was it shown as a reference in the procedure. The inspector will follow up on this item in a future inspectio The inspector noted that, in F.C. #5, the minimum recirculation flow rate of the pump had been cut back from 90 to 40 gpm. A reason for this change was not supplied in FC #5. The licensee said that the 90 gpm was intended for two pumps. Since they were only using one pump, the minimum flow could be cut back to 45 gpm (or as low as 40.5 gpm with the -4.5 gpm tolerance)

without overheating the pump. The actual value found in the field was 42 gpm which is above the minimum acceptable value of 40.5 gp The inspector had no further questions on this procedur Findings No discrepancies or violations were identified during the above review. There were, however, several open test exceptions that require licensee corrective action to resolve. These test excep-tions were assigned to the incomplete items list (IIL) or, in certain cases, a work request (WR) was issued for tracking purposes. The following open test exceptions, identified in previous NRC reports, are being consolidated into one unresolved item (443/86-01-01) and unresolved items 443/85-26-01 and 443/85-30-02 are close The following IIL numbers correspond to open test exceptions and, collectively, constitute unresolved item 443/86-01-01.

.

f Procedure N Short Title ILL No, i

l 1-PT(I)-35 RCS Hydro RC-0684, RC-0763, RC-0696, RC-0698, RC-0802, RC-0847, RC-848, RC-849, RC-850, RC-852 1-PT-1 Spent Fuel Cooling SF-0163

1-PT-1 Spent Fuel C/U SF-0161 and SF-0162

!

I k

. .

Procedure N Short Title ILL N PT-10 SI Accum. Blowdown SI-0426 and Active Work Request SI-0425 1-AT-1 Fire Pump Flow Ca FP-0420 and FP-0419 1-PT-8 ECCS Performance SI-0459, SI-0458 and RH-0400 1-PT-1 Nuclear Instrumentation NI-0093, NI-0094 and NI-0092 1-PT-1 Containment Spray CBS-0595 and CBS-0594 1-AT- Condensate CAS-0192 1-PT(I)-1 Reactor Coolant Pumps Work Request No. RC-0804 1-PT- CVCS Charging System CS-1012 1-PT- CVCS, Boron Thermal Regeneration CS-1450 1-PT(I)-1 MSIVs MS-1222 1-PT(I)-1 Emergency Feedwater FW-1270 and FW-1223 1-PT(I)-4 Condenser Steam Dump MS-1140, MS-1320 and WR-MS-1335 1-AT- Startup Feedwater Pump FW-1028 4.0 QA/QC Interface Scope Startup QA surveillance reports were reviewed for coverage of the Hot Functional Tes Discussion

-

Startup QA surveillance reports as identified in Attachment B were i reviewed for scope of inspection and the nature of their findings. All of these reports are related to the Hot Functional Tests. Good coverage was l provided for these test Findings No noncompliances were identified by the inspector within the scope of

this review.

!

5.0 Independent Verification The inspector performed independent calculations of pump head values for

the emergency feedwater pumps during test results review discussed in Paragraph 3.2 of this report.

,

I l

!

. _ _ - - - . . . . . - .

. .

i

<

J 6.0 Plant Tours The inspector, accompanied by the Resident Inspector, made a tour of the a

'

facility. Areas toured included the containment, the fuel storage build-ing, control building, the primary auxiliary building, emergency feedwater pump house, the diesel generator building, turbine building and the heater bay. The inspector observed work in progress, housekeeping, cleanliness control, and status of construction activities. The following observations were made:

'

• The emergency diesel generators (EDGs), Colt-Pielstick units, had good piping layout for fuel oil and lube oil, and fire secure mount-

ing of fuel oil filters. The brush holders support bars, which are

identical to the original bars of the Millstone 3 EDGs, had not been replaced yet but were scheduled to be in the near futur * Good main control board panel layout with simple and effective

, mimic * Heavy dust layers on cables in cable trays of the Turbine Buildin * Crane layout in Fuel Building to meet heavy load criteri No violations were identifie .0 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable, an item of noncompliance

or a deviation. An unresolved item concerning open test exceptions is discussed in Paragraph 3.2 of this repor .0 Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection on January 10, 1986, an exit interview was conducted with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted in Section 1). The findings were identified and previous inspection items were discusse At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector. Based on the NRC Region I review of this j report and discussions held with licensee representatives during this inspection, it was determined that this report does not contain informa-tion subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restrictions.

!

,

- . , . - - - - - , - ., -, ,y, ,-.__-,.._.._____.,.<_.._.__.,.m --,e._, . . , _ , . - _ _ . . - . . , . _ _ _ . - . , _ - . . , , , , . . - . . . _ . _ . . .

,

ATTACHMENT A PREOPERATIONAL AND ACCEPTANCE TEST RESULTS REVIEWED

--

1-PT(I)-2.2, Pressurizer Relief Tank Hot Functional Test, Revision 3, results approved on December 18, 198 PT(I)-6.2, Boron Thermal Regeneration System Hot Functional Test, Revision 2, results approved on December 18, 1985

--

1-PT(I)-9, ECCS Hot Functional Test, Revision 2, results approved on December 30, 198 PT(I)-13.2, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves Hot Functional Test, Revision 0, results approved on December 4, 198 PT(I)-14.2, Emergency Feedwater System (HFT), Revision 0, results approved on December 18, 198 l

--

1-PT(I)-40.7, Condenser Steam Sump System, Revision 0, results approved l

on December 11, 1985.

l- --

1-PT(I)-40.10, Heat Removal Demonstration Test, Revision 1, results approved on December 11, 198 AT-1.3, Startup Feed Pump Test, Revision 1, results approved on October 25, 198 AT-24.1, Electrical Penetration Area Air Conditioning System, Revision 2, results approved on September 30, 1985.

--

1-AT(I)-24.2, Electrical Penetration Area Hot Functional Test, Revision 1, results approved on November 22, 1985.

.

--

1-AT-42.2, Electro-Hydraulic Control Fluid System, Revision 1, results approved on September 30, 1984.

i z

h

}

\

~ -- -. - - _ _ , - .-. . ... - - _ , . - . , - - - --- - - - - - - , -

_ _ . - _ -. -_. . . _ - . ~ _ - - . _ . . . _

,

. .

1-J j ATTACHMENT B

,

'

TO 50-443/86-01

'

REVIEW OF SURVEILLANCE REPORTS (SRs) BY YAEC - FQAG f

l Sury. Report Report

,

N Test. Proc. Observed TP Title Date - SR I

, Y-290 PT(I)-14.2, Rev. 0 EFW System 11-26-85

"

l' Y-266 "

11-23-85 Y-273 " "

11-22-85

"

. Y-274 "

11-25-85

"

Y-281 "

11-24-85 i Y-184 PT(I)-9, Rev. 2 ECC System (HFT) 11-14-85

"

Y-188 "

11-15-85

"

Y-263 "

11-23-85

"

i Y-271 "

11-22-85

" "

! Y-309 11-28-85

<

Y-101 PT(I)-2.2, Rev. 3 Press. Relief Tank 11-09-85

"

l Y-174 "

11-14-85

.

Y-74 PT(I)-1.2, Rev. O RC Pump (HFT) 11-07-85

"

! Y-95 "

11-08-85

, Q2.6.21.9656 PT-16.1, Rev. 1 Primary Comp. Cooling 10-15-85

" ' "

Q2.6.21.9657 10-15-85

" "

,

Q2.6.21.9653 10-13-85

" "

Q2.6.21.9707 10-19-85

" "

I Q2.6.21.9701 10-17-85

" "

l Q2.6.21.9688 10-16-85 I " "

Q2.6.21.9672 10-15-85

i

j T

(

!

!

I..,... - _ . . , , . . . _ , _ . _ , _ . . _ _ . , , _ _ . . _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ , . . _ _ , _ _ _ _ , _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ .