IR 05000482/1988033
| ML20205R039 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1988 |
| From: | Ray Azua, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205Q998 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-88-33, NUDOCS 8811090430 | |
| Download: ML20205R039 (6) | |
Text
_
..
.
L
-
- . :
...
-
.,
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION
REGION IV
,
NRC Inspection Report:
50-482/88-33 Operating License: NPF"40
' Docket:
50-482
.
Licensee: WolfCreekNuclearOperatingCorporation(WCNOC)
,
i P.O. Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)
Inspection At: WCGS, Coffey County, Burlington, Kansas Inspection Conducted: October 11-15, 1988
!
.
Inspector:
-I
/#/Fdr e
/
R.W. =0,R:GLi anTpector, Test Programs Da'te /
Section, Division of Reactor Safety
'
i
/0/A.9- #
f Approved:
a g7f g W.'C. SeidM. CKief, Test Programs Section Dhte /
l i
Division of Reactor Safety
[
l t
inspection Sunnary inspectio),. Conducted October 11-15, 1988 (Report 50-482/88-33)
i Areas Inspected:
Routine, announe.ed inspection of the Wolf Creek containment integrated leak rate test (CIL' O.
f Results: Within the area inspected, no violations or deviations were
identified.
.!
!
!
[
,
g
,
.
.
.
- -
t
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
___ _ __
.y
-.;,.
,.
.,
l
DETAILS
,
,
e l
1.
Persons Contacted
'
~.
'
KG&E
- F. T. Rhodes. Vice President, Nuclear Operations
- G. D. Boyer Plant Manager
- M. G. Williams, Manager, Plant Support
!
- C, Fowler, Manager, Instrumentation and Control (!&C)
- A. A. Freitag. Manager, Nuclear Plant Engineering
'
!
- W. M. Lindsay, Manager, Quality Evaluations
-
O. L. Maynard, Manager, Licensing
!
i
- V. Mactaggart, Supervisor, Results Engineering i
,
- S. F. Hatch. Acting Supervisor, Quality Systems
'
)
- K. R. Peterson, Supervisor, Licensing
-
S.'Wideman, Licensing
[
- C. J. Hoch, Quality Assurance Technician
W. Steiner, Supervisor I&C
[
B. Manwaring. Training Specialist, I&C
L. Sumner Supervisor, Metrology
- T. J. Birzer, CILRT Dayshift Test Coordinator
D. Jacobs, CILRT Nightshift Test Coordinator
!
'
J. McGregor, CILRT Director
[
.
!
j General Physics R. M. Carey, CILRT Consultant NRC l
l
- B. L. Bartlett, Senior Resident Inspector
-
M. E. Skow, Resident Inspector
!
!
- Denotas tho'.e pru ent during the exit interview held on October 14, 1988.
!
2.
CILRT Procedure Review (70307)
i
!
,
The NRC inspector reviewed Procedure No. STS PE-018, Revision 1, i
"Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test" and Procedure No. CKL PE-018,
[
Revision 0, "!LRT System Lineups."
t
,
The NRC inspector reviewed the procedures to verify that the licensee had
[
incorporated the associated regulatory requirements and commitments.
In i
addition, both procedures were verified to have the proper approvels as (
indicated by appropriate signatures.
F
,
i I
_ ___. _-
_ - _ _ - - _ _ - _
-______ _ _________ -________ _ _ __
_ _ _ _
'
v.
.
.
,
The NRC inspector chose some randomly selected systems, which were addressed in Procedure No. CKL PE-018. for review against the licensee's piping and instrumentation diagrams (P& ids). This was done in an effort to determine that all the appropriate valves in the selected systems were addressed in. the procedure (Section 4.0).
The NRC inspector also reviewed the test position of the valves, listed in the same procedure, to verify that the associated systems were placed in correct alignment for the performance of the CILRT.
Finally, the NRC inspector determined that all appropriate systems required to be aligned for the CILRT were addressed in the valve lineup procedure.
The CILRT Procedure No. STS PE-018 gives the licensee the option to either perform the 24-hour. Type A. Total Time Test, as described in ANSI N45.4-1972 "Leakage Rate Testing of Containment Structures for Nuclear Reactors" (dated March 16,1972) or, under favorable conditions, the licensee can perform a redur.ed time test, using the methodology described in Bechtel Topical Report BN TOP-1.
The NRC inspector reviewed the two options and found them to be technically adequate.
The NRC inspector reviewed the temporary changes that were made to Procedure No. STS PE-018, and found them to be acceptable. They did not alter, in any significant manner, the technical content of the procedure or change the way in which the test was being performed. The NRC inspector also verifica that these changes were approved, as indicated by the appropriate signatures, and that these changes were made in accordance with Administrative Procedure No. ADM 07-100. Revision 35, "Preparation, Review, Approval, and Distribution of WCGS Procedures."
One observation was made to the licensee concerning the temporary change package for Procedure No. STS PE-018.
It was found that there ware more changes to the procedure than could be listed on the temporary change form. As allowed by ADM 07-100, the other changes were written on blank white sheets of paper and attached to the temporary change fom. This package was then reviewed and signed off. The NRC inspector noted that the white sheets had not been numbered and that the temporary change fonn did not list how many pages were attached. Upon review of ADH 07-100, it was found that the procedure only suggests that the pages be numbered but does not require it. The NRC Inspector infomed the licensee that this was not consistent with comon industry practice where normally, for quality assurance purposes, pages are required to be numbered to maintain accountability.
The NRC inspector expressed the concern that following its review, a page in the temporary change package could be lost or misplaced, and that an approved change may fail to be entered into the affected procedure.
The licensee responded to the NRC inspector's concern by paginating the tes;crery change package for Procedure No. STS PE-018 and by comitting to wMring these pages in the futur _
-.
,
, -. _
--
.j 7
..
,,
J
!
.
'
Finally, both procedures were reviewed by the NRC inspector for technical adequacy.
I No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
!
area.
3.
CILRT Surveillance (70313)
The NRC inspector performed several tours of the reactor containment building and the auxiliary building.
This was done to monitor the instal-lation of the test equipment and the valve lineup process.
The valve lineup process was performed using Procedure No. CKL PE-018, Revision 0.
The NRC inspector noted that the tags used for the CILRT
!
valve lineup were the "Do Not Operate" (DNO) tags used at the plant. The i
.
tags identified the valve number, the condition in which the valve was
>
required to be positioned, and contained the signatures of the installer
'
and of the independent verifier,
,
The tags also contained a tracking number, which was controlled by the t
plant control room.
The NRC inspector reviewed the plant administrative procedure for tagging, ADM 02-100, to determine the effectiveness of this i
tagging process. The NRC inspector found the tagging process to be quite
j '
acceptable, for it provided documentation and accounta)ility of the valve
'
.
lineup, in addition to that found in Procedure No. CKL PE-018. Also, the j
tags were easily recognized by the plant personnel who had been trained
,
as to tho meaning of these tags.
This significantly reduced the possibility j
that plant personnel could accidentally alter the position of a tagged
valve.
>
I a.
The NRC inspector reviewed a sample of 43 valves that had been positioned
[
and tagged for this test.
No errors or discrepancies were noted.
i The calibration documentation for the test equipment (RTDs, dewpoint
!
hygrometers, voltmeters, and pressure gauges), provided by both
[
Volumetrics and the site I&C department, were reviewed by the NRC
,
inspector.
The procedures by which the plant I&C technicians calibrated f
some of the equipment were reviewed by the NRC inspector. No errors were
!
,
detected and all instruments were found to be in calibration for the i
period encompassing tice tests. The NRC inspector also reviewed the f
certification and training recurds of one of the technicians involved in
'
calibrating some of the test equipment. The NRC inspector also ronitored the insitu calibration of one of the dewcell hygrometers, t
q
The NRC inspector observed that some of the licensee's I&C department procedures, used to calibrate test equipment, were developed under the
,
auspices of I&C Procedure No INC C-1000, Revision 2, "Calibration of
!
Miscellaneous Components."
It was noted that all of these procedures were
[
encompassed by INC C-1000 as subprocedures and thus, all had the same
,
'
!
procedure number. The only method of tracking these procedures was by the instrument number or identification, which was located on the "Miscellaneous
'
!
!
l
,
- - - - - - -
,.,~--,,,n,
.-nn--~~
_n,-,.
~c-~~~n<,n---
--r
,v-,-n.--
n -,,- -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
____ __ _-_-___ _ __ _
', *
-
.
.
Components Test Record." The only other method of distinguishing each subprocedure was through its title. The NRC inspector found that there was a lack of specificity in the writing of these titles. The NRC inspector noted that two procedures, describing two different types of tests to be performed on one piece of equipment, had the same title which only described the cabinet in which this piece of equipment was located during the CILRT.
The NRC inspector observed the lack of a unique title on the cover of these subprocedures. This could allow a technician to accidentally pull the wrong subprocedure, especially in those cases in which one piece of equipment may have two or more calibration procedures.
,
The NRC inspector accompanied the licensee on the final walkdown of the reactor containment building on October 14, 1988.
In general, with the exception of two minor items, the licensee was found to have given a significant amount of attention to detail.
The NRC inspector reviewed the local leak rate test (LLRT) data that was obtained prior to or during the preparation for the CILRT.
The personnel airlock to the reactor containment building was closed, and
,
.
the initiation of the containment pressurization was done on October 14, 1988. The minimum test pressure of 49.6 psig was reached at approximately
'
7 p.m., on October 14, 1988. At 2:30 a.m., on October 15, 1988, the licensee met the stabilization criteria as described in Procedure No. STS PE-018.
The licensee, at this time, began taking test data every 15 minutes, marking the official start of the CILRT.
i The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's controlled copy of Procedure Nos. STS PE-018 and CKL PE-018, to verify that the proper sections had been signed off, and that all the prerequisites had been met.
At approximately 10 a.m., on October 15, 1988, the licensee decided, based on the data accumulated since the beginning of the test that the BN TOP-1
short duration test would be used to complete the test.
As stated before, Procedure No. STS PE-018 gave the licensee the alternative to ute either one or the other method. Based on the infomation available at the time, the NRC inspector had no concerns with this decision.
The CILRT was completed on October 16, 1988, and based on the preliminary data, no leakage was detected that appeared to exceed the.75La limit, I
identified in Chapter 10 of the Federal Code of Regulations, Part 50, Appendix J.
The NRC inspector will perfom a review of the results when the final report is issued. The results of this review will be documented in a later NRC report.
No violations or deviations were identified in the review of this program
area, i
i I
_
_
__- -,__
_
i
. ', ',
..
4.
Exit Interview An exit interview was held on October 14, 1988.
The NRC inspector sumarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the information provided to, or reviewed by, the NRC inspector.
P