IR 05000482/1989025
| ML20248C645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1989 |
| From: | Barnes I, Ellershaw L, Stewart R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248C643 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-89-25, NUDOCS 8910030532 | |
| Download: ML20248C645 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
._
.
.
.
..
.
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-462/89-25 Operating License: NPF-42 Docket: 50-482 Licensee: Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCN0C)
P.O. Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66E39 Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)
Inspection At: Burlington, Kansas Inspection Conducted:
September 11-15, 1989 Inspectors:
8.e
'7/26/rv
[ R. C. Stewart, Reactor Inspector, Materials Date and Quality Programs Section, Division of Re tor Safety h ae
$ AS/E?
LV E. Ellershaw, Reactor Inspector, Materials Date
'
and Quality Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety Approved:
dm
<td4 M7 1. Barnes, Chief, Materials and Quality Date Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety l
Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted September 11-15. 1989 (Report 50-482/89-25)
i Areas Ir.spected: Routine, unannounced inspection of inservice testing (IST) of I
pumps and valves. Subject areas reviewed included licensee submitted relief
requests and current status, administrative controls and procedures, i
maintenance records and postmaintenance testing, and the witnessing of surveillance testing of pumps and valves.
Resul-ts: in general, the licensee's tes.t procedures were well detailed in
addressing ASME Section XI Code requirements, reference values, and acceptance-criteria. Operations personnel demonstrated alertness to procedural detail and i
knowledge of system performance requirements. A sampling of maintenance e910030532 890927 ADOCK0500g2 FOR
_ _ - -
-
_ - _-____________
.
.
-
-2-records (pumps and valves) ind' n teu postmaintenance tests were performed as required. In addition, check valve disassembly and inspections were performed during the previous outage and as required by IST Program Relief Recuests 15, 16, and 17.
!
No violations or deviations were identified.
!
l l
i l
i I
]
w
..
e
'
.
.
-3-i l
DETAILS
,
l i
!
1.
Persons Contacted WCNOC
'
- G. D. Boyer, Plant Manager
- C. E. Parry, Manager, Site Quality
- 0. L. Maynard, Manager, Regulatory Services
- W. M. Lindsay, Manager, Quality Assurance
- D. Walsh, IST Engineer
.'
- S. G. Wideman, Licensing Specialist III
- D. Dullam. Engineer, Compliance
- L. Stevens, System Engineer
,
H. K. Chernoff, Supervisor, Licensing
R. D. Flannigan, Manager, Nuclear Safety Engineering M. Pitco, Surveillance Coordinator J. M. Pippin, Manager, Nuclear Plant Engineering R. W. Holloway, Manager, Maintenance and Modifications B. Martin, Shift Supervisor S. Walgren, Supervisor, Operations B. Dunlap, Reactor Operator W. Drogemuler, Reactor Operator
- Denotes attendance at an exit interview held on September 15, 1989.
I The inspectors also contacted other plant personnel, including operators, l
technicians, and administrative personnel.
'
2.
Inspection of Inservice Testing - Pumps and Valves (73756)
The objectives of this inspection were to review the' licensee's current IST Program (Revision 7) for additions or deletions from the previously
)
submitted program (Revision 6) and to observe functional testing of pumps J
and valves for the purpose of assessing the adequacy of the testing i
performed with respect to the licensee's commitments and requirements of Section XI of the ASME Code, 1980 edition through winter 1981 Addenda, j
a.
Program Review and Relief Request Status l
During the inspection, the inspectors conducted a review of the IST j
program documents to assure recent revisions and approved relief
~
requests were in accordance with the latest safety evaluation reports. The documents reviewed included the following-
,
Administrative Procedure 02-301, "ASME Code Testing of Pumps and
Valves," Revision 6, dated June 6, 1989;
,
Administrative Procedure 02-310. " Inservice Testing Program for
"
Pumps and Valves," Revision 3, dated December 27, 1988; I
.!
!
j
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
..
.
.
..
-4-
~
" Inservice Testing Program for Pumps and Valves," Revision 7
l-dated April 1988; i
Safety Evaluation Report (SER)' dated January 15, 1988;.and
Safety Evaluation Report (SER)'deted March 9,.19S9.
- The licensee's IST administrative program appears.to comply with ASME Code requirements.and is in agreement with the most current SER.
..
No violatioto of deviations were identified.
b.
Witness - Pump and Valve Testing-During the inspection, the' inspectors accompanied plant operations personnel.to observe functional-testing of the following pumps and:
valves:
'
!
_
,
~
i Component Cooling Water Pumps and Associated-Check Valves,
"
PEG 01A and PEG 010, Inservice Test Procedure STS-E0-100A; Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump, PALO2, Inservice Test Procedure STS-AL-103; Reactor Makeup Water System,' Conte.cwnt Isolation Valve BL HV-8047',
- '
~
Operability Test Inservice Test Proceoure STS-BL-205; Steam Generator Blowdown System Valves, (11 Valves - Full Stroke
'
Test) Inservice Test Procedure STS-8M-201; Nuclear Sampling System Containment Isolation Valve Operability
Test, Inservice. Test Procedure STS-SJ-20h During the tests, the inspectors observed operators following
.
!
step-by-step procedural operations and the recording of. test. data.
In addition, the inspectors observed independent verifications, vibrometer measurements, and-test equipment calibration status.-
For each of the w'tnessed tests, the inspectors observed that all
.
test results were within the reference value er.velope established for each component, j
Additional observations made by the inspectors included the
,
following:
'est procedures appeared to be well detailed, including such
T
",
attributes as: purpose ar.d scope, prerequisites, precautions, pretest verification, ~ corrective action, acceptance' criteria,.
and independent verifications.
i v-
.1
I-
<
.;
.
'
.s
.-
,
,
.....
Q I-5-
Each test was' conducted by the cognizant shift reactor operator
locate'J in the control room, in-accordance with the applicable test trocedure.
Control room activities were disciplined and reflected an
- -
atmosphere of professionalism.
No violations or deviations were identified.
c.
Maintenance Records and post Maintenance Testing This area of the inspection was performed in order to assure that the licensee was complying with the requirements established in
- Articles IWP-3000 and IWV-3000 in Section XI of the ASME' Code. -Both of these articles require that pumps and. valves, after having been replaced, repaired, or serviced, be tested to demonstrate that the perfomance parameters or sets of reference values, are within acceptable limits.
The inspectors were provided a printout which, listed all' work requests (WRs) associated with maintenance and repair of valves and pumps since January 1986. The inspectors selected 19 WRs which addressed maintenance and repair activities, and which would have necessitated the performance of postmaintenance testing. Review of the documentation packages associated with:the WRs showed that six had been cancelled as a result of the work not being required. The remaining 13 packages contained the applicable work instruction and sign-off sheets'and included reference to the appropriate test procedures, which were reviewed by the inspectors.
In addition to being a sequenced set of operations which describe how to perfom the j
test, the procedures also become a permanent record for.the actual i
performance of the test, in that each operation is checked-off with appropriate sign-offs. Review of the referenced test procedures by the inspectors revealed that all operations had been-checked-off/ signed-off, indicating completion of the operation.
It would appear that the licensee has performed the necessary ~
postmaintenance testing as required by their program and the ASME
!
Code.
O
i No violations or deviations were identified.
.
l 3.
Exit Interview l
,
The inspectors met with the licensee representatives denoted in'
.
paragraph.1 on September 15 1989, and sumar.ized the inspection scope and
i
'
!
findings.- The licensee did not identify as proprietary any'of the information provided to or. reviewed by the inspectors.
j l
!
!
I
')
w.
,
,