IR 05000482/1989028
| ML20011D453 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1989 |
| From: | Barnes I, Mcneill W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011D452 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-89-28, NUDOCS 8912270261 | |
| Download: ML20011D453 (9) | |
Text
._..
(o
...
.
.
APPENDIX-
- .
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
'
--
NRC Inspection Report: 50-482/89-28 Operating License: NPF-42 L
Docket:. 50-482
,
. Licensee: Wolf Creek Nuclear Cperating Corporation (k'CNOC)
D.D. Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)
[:
Inspection At: WCGS, Burlington, Kansas s
Inspection Conducted: November 13 through 17 and November 27 through
'
December 1, 1989 i
Inspector:
d8#
n.//r/r, p W. M. McNeill, Reactor Inspector, Materials Date and Quality Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety Approved:
3-0 -
i a./ir/PP 1. Barces.. Chief, Meterials and Quality Date Programs Section, Division of Reactor Safety
.
_ Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted flovember 13 through 17 and November 27 through December 1, 1989 (Report 50-482/89-28)
Areas-Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of action on previously identified inspection findings and self-assessment capability.
Results: The nuclear safety review committee (HSRC) meetings appeared to be well documented and resolution of NSRC concerns was effective. The NSRC use and management of subcommittees appeared to be very effective. Minor improvements could be made in the process used for handling and close out of cetion items.
The plant safety review committee (PSRC) meetings were not as well documented
'
as the NSP.C meetings.
In particular, improvements could be made in regard to documenting the initial level of review of subjects by the PSRC and development
/$22ggg $2
Q j
y-
-
'
+
,9
^~
,[L;
.,.
,
ky
.
,
..e
l*
!
<
- "?
.
u
,
l i
,
"
.
.
-
,
of a more formal process for' handling of action' items. Nuclear safety engineering <(NSE)activitiesappearedtobewelldocumented,withfollowupon i
' identified concerns-and recommendations being foundoto be effective. Minor-l
.improvementsLeould be made in regard to providing a fuller description.of NSE l
,[
activities 11n procedures and more clearly describing in reports the significance j
034
.and resolution of plant tour observations.-
,.
r
.
.
'
No violations or deviations were identified during this' inspection.
l
'
r i
t:
R a
'!
w'T
L I
i
)
~!
!
)
3.,
.i n
f
,
F
'
Oh '
,
!'
'
'J'
.
-
{
=,
!
>
.
[.
,
s
'..'
'
,
i i
_
_
_..
- -.
_ _ _ _
.
,,
.
-3-
'
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted WCNOC
- H. L. Chernoff, Licensing Supervisor
- J. H. Damet, Nuclear Safety Engineering (llSE) Engineer
- R. D. Flannigan, NSE Manager
- C, W. Fowler, Instrument and Controls Manager
- R. M. Grant, Quality Vice President
- R. C. Hagan, Nuclear Safety Review Committee (NSRC) Chairman
- R. W. Holloway, Maintenance and Modifications Manager C. Lee, Plant Safety Review Conmittee (PSRC) Clerk
- W. M. Lindsey, Quality Assurance Manager
- A. S. Mal, NSE Engineer 0. L. Maynard, Licensing Manager
- B. T. McKinney, 0)erations Manager
- W. B. Norton, Tecinical Support Manager
- C. E. Parry, Quality Assurance Manager D. S. Phillips, PSRC Clerk
- C. W. Russo, Trainer
- R. L. Sims. Equipment F91neering Supervisor
- L. W. Stevens, NSE Supervisor
- S. G. Wideman, Licensing Specialist
- D. J. Womeldorf, flSE Engineer
- H. G. Williams, Plant Support Manager
,
NRC
- B. L. Bartlett, Senior Resident Inspector
- M. E. Skow, Senior Resident inspector
- Denotes those persons that attended the exit interview on December 1, 1989.
The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel during the
,
inspection, 2.
Action on Previously Identified Inspection Findings (92701 and 92702)
a.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem(482/8815-02):
Implementation of corrective actions in regard to changing the review of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (AStiE)Section XI Code replacement activities
from after installation to prior to installation.
.
The inspector found that the licensco's planned corrective actions have been implemented. Programmatic Deficiency Report (PDR) MM-88-09, which addressed the planned corrective actions, was issued on April 20, and closed om August 31, 1988.
j
. _
['
...
,,
$
-4
<
Procedure ADM 01-036, paragraph 9.3.2, was revised as a result and the review of ASME Section XI Code replacement activities is now
required prior to inst 411ation.
i b.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem(482/8835-01):
Handling of NSE concerns.
A review was performed by an NSRC subcommittee in regard to the handling and tracking of NSE concerns.
Recommendations made by the L
subcommittee were utilized to better define in NSE procedures the process for handling of concerns. The revised procedures have been
issued and implemented. The specific questions on the qualifications
'
of a member of NSRC and resistance temperature device cross calibrations were reviewed by the licensee and found to be resolved. Other NSE reports were reviewed by the licensee in regard to the same problem and found to be satisfactory, c.
(Closed) Violation (482/8907-01):
Failure to provide a safety evaluation for a temporary modification.
Procedure ADM 01-022 has been changed in pa:agraph 4.2.1 to require that a safety evaluation be performed even when the Updated Safety
Analysis Report description of the subject is general in nature. The inspector found in review of a sample of temporary modifications that all screenings and safety evaluations appeared complete and satisfactory.
3.
Licensee Self-Assessment Capability (40500)
The objective of this inspection was to evaluate the effectiveness of the licensee's self-assessment programs.- In this regard, the inspector
,
'
reviewed the activities of the NSRC, PSRC, and the NSE. The thrust of i
this inspection was to measure how effective these groups were in identification of concerns and following such to resolution.
,
a.
NSRC The activities of the NSRC were governed by Procedure KP-CC200, "NSRC Charter," Revision 0, dated June 1, 1989. The NSRC was found to meet regularly once a quarter. Four regular meetings have been held in 1989. Three special meetings have also been held in 1989 with only one or two agenda-items. Regular meetings differed from the special meetings in that a standard format of agenda items were reviewed.
The NSRC membership was Manager, Nuclear Service; Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services; Hanager, Quality Assurance; Vice President, Nuclear Operations; Manager, Regulatory Services; Senior Director of Nuclear Affairs; Manager, Ar;alysis Services; Huclear Coordinator; and two outside consultanu The standard format meetings addressed such agenda items as:
l Approval of previous meeting minutes;
l l-M
-
,...
.
,
..
i.
-5-t
Subcommittee membership changes; L
Subcommittee reports which included plant modifications, security, compliance, radiological safety, and PSRC review;
'
Audit schedule;
Operations and PSRC activities;
NSE activities;
,
Licensing report;
'
Special subjects;
Calloway NSRC activities; Action items; and
Next meeting.
The inspector reviewed the meeting minutes of 1989 in detail and the training and qualification records of the members.
Observations by the inspector were as follows:
The meeting minutes appeared to be well documen 4d. Discussions of subjects were found to be of sufficient dee p ond scope to indicate a thorough review of the subject.
The meeting minutes demonstrated that the NSRC was very
effectively using subcommittees to perform reviews. The subcommittee reports were attached to minutes and appeared to be of the same quality as the full committee minutes.
l
Thirty-five action items were identified in the 1989 minutes of which only 18 were in an open status, with the oldest only 5 months old.
- Review of a sample of 30 safety evaluations from the 1988 10 CFR 50.59 report found that appropriate reviews had been performed by the flSRC, One action item, 89-01a-01, was noted, which was not discussed in the text of the minutes, but was identified as being closed in the action item log attached to tieeting Minutes 89-03. The action item was closed based on the issuance and resolution of Engineering Evaluation Request (EER) 89 AB-05 dated April 7, 1989.
In the inspector's judgment, it appeared that the process would be enhanced if closecut documentation was always attached to meeting minutes. This practice, which has been done in
.-
-
-
h
'
o'
'
.,
.
..
V[
-6-i L
certain cases, would assure closure of an action item is reviewed by all NSRC members, h
I
The subcomittees also had action items identified in their L
reports; however, it was not always cicar what were action items and what was their status. The 89-03-1 modification subcomittee minutes contained a coment in the text, which i
stated that review of recent plant modification requests (PMRs)
indicated a weakness in some of the safety evaluations.. The
,
'
weakness appeared to be that the attached sumaries to the unreviewed safety question determinations did not always address.
the required criteria. This coment was not identified as an action item by either the subcommittee or the full committee.
'
One subcomittee, the compliance subcommittee, was particularly good in identification of action items on the subcommittee level and the tracking of such to closecut in its reports. Overall-control of this activity would appear to be enhanced if all subcommittees identified and tracked action items in the same-r manner.
In that NSRC meetings are frequently held off site, adoption of
a practice by NSRC members of touring the site on a regular basis and reporting any observations was considered by the inspector would enhance this activity.
<
Sumary
,
,
The NSRC meetings appeared to be well documented and resolution of L
concerns effective. The NSRC use and management of subcomittees appeared to be very effective. Minor improvements could be made in the process used for handling and closeout of action items.
b.
PSRC The activities of the PSRC were governed by an Administrative Procedure, ADM 01-002, " Plant tafety Review Comittee," Revision 21, dated August 22, 1989. The UIM met weekly in regular meetings and held special meetings as required by circumstances. At regular meetings typically 25 to 30 agenda items were addressed and at special meetings typically one or two agenca items were addressed.
As of this inspection, about 85 meetings have been held this year.
The PSRC membership was found to be as described in the Technical Specifications. The meetings addressed such agenda items as:
Approval of previous meeting minutes;
Approval of procedures;
.
Procedure subcomittee report; I
PMRs; PDRs; l
Temporary Modification Orders;
'
Temporary Change Forms;
.
.
-
-
-
-
.
,
c
<4-8 g,
..
-7-
'
>
Technical Specification Interpretation Requests;
'
Work Request Engineering Disposition;
Industry Technical Information Program (ITIP); and
" Jump Up Items" or late agenda additions of the above items.
- The inspector reviewed the meeting minutes numbered 385 through 394 in detail and the training and qualification records of members. The inspector attended PSRC Meetings 396 and 398.
Observations by the inspector were as follows:
The meeting minutes appeared to be not as well documented as
!
'
those generated by the NSRC. Observations made in regard to l
areas where PSRC minutes could be enhanced are discussed below.
Discussions of subjects documented in minutes were found to be of sufficient depth and scope to indicate a thorough review of the subject. Subcommittees appeared to be effectively used for
review of minor procedure revisions, i
!
l Review of a sample of 30 safety evaluations f rom 1988
,
10 CFR 50.59 report found that appropriate reviews had been
'
performed by the PSRC.
,
In review of tite meeting minutes, the inspector noted a number
of subjects were identified which appeared to be action items, but had not been identified as such.
For example, in Meeting 386, the manager of maintenance and modifications was requested to review and revise Procedure ADM 01-053 in regard to
',
reportability of EERs.
In Meeting 387, all PSRC members agreed to review with their work groups the level of detail required to be identified in the change forms submitted with revised procedures.
In Meeting 389, the committee requested the compliance grot.p to evaluate for reportability a concern e
!
associated with Safety Evaluation 89-SE-049.
In Meetings 391, 392, and 394, PMR 01703, Revision 0, was successively submitted and not recommended for implementation because the PSRC questioned if the impact on the security plan had been addressed. None of the preceding examples were identified as t
action items.
In the sample of minutes reviewed by the inspector, there were no action items identified.
It appears
,
that in 1989 there were only five action items identified. The absence of action items may be the result of the absence of guidance and definition in the procedure of what constitutes an action item, and how it is to be identified and tracked to resolution. The ins)ector considered a procedure revision in this regard would enunce the conduct of PSRC activities.
The initial review by PSRC members of procedures, modifications,
and alike was not clearly documented and could be improved. The PSRC meeting minutes only reflected comments and concerns that were not resolved in the initial review proces ~ ~
r s
,
p
'o
,
8-
.
i h
[
Summary-The PSRC meetings appeared to be not as well documented as the NSRC meetings.
Improvements could be made in regard to documentation of
'
!
'the initial level of review of subjects by PSRC and the development of a more formalized process for handling of action items.
"
I c.
NSE The activities of NSE, the WCGS name for an independent safety engineering group, were found to be governed by two procedures, KP-NS2200, " Statement of Responsibilities Nuclear Safety c
Engineering," Revision 0, dated May 30, 1989, and KP-NS2201,
" Surveillance of WCGS Activities by Nuclear Safety Engineering,"
Revision 0, dated May 30, 1989.
The NSE function reported to the manager of regulatory services and was found to be staffed with five engineers and a manager. The NSE's activities included:
Plant tours;
" Quick Looks" or special subjects identified by the NSE manager;
Reviews of procedures and their changes;
Reviews of ITIP which included such items as NRC information.
- notices and Institute of Nuclear Power Operations significant
'
event reports, signif1 cant operating experience reports, and operating and maintenance reminders; Reviews of defect / deficiency reports and licensee event reports;
Reviews of EERs; and
Reviews of PSRC meetings and minutes.
- The NSE function was required by its procedures to perform an annual overview or audit of the ITIP process. Activities were documented in monthly surveillance reports, with additional surveillance reports also being. issued for nonroutine surveillance activities. The inspector reviewed Monthly Surveillance Reports89-116, 89-117, and 89-120 and the seven nonroutine surveillances performed during the same 3-month time period.
It was noted that in 1989, 4 concerns and 22 recommendations have been identified by NSE and that of these, 3 concerns and 10 recommendations are open currently. The oldest of these is 8 months.
Observations by the inspector were as follows:
(.
<c.
,
,.
.;
i-9-
'
l
The NSE procedures did not fully describe NSE activities in
,
regard to:
(1) the use of a surveillance form or check list and
,
L a matrix used for assuring distribution of NSE activities in plant tours, and (2) the screening and sampling process used in e
procedure review activities.
Inclusion of more detail regarding these activities was considered would improve the value of the
!
,:
procedures.
I Reports issued by NSE did not always have a clear text in regard l
to the significance of or closeout method for findings
- -
categorized as observations. For example, observations of
leaking valves were documented in reports without identification i
of the significance of the valves (i.e., safety-related or
,
,
balance of plant). Reports also identified industrial safety i
i issues such as trip hazards, but did not clearly describe how
-
the issues were followed to resolution. Additional detail concerning the specifics of and resolution of observations would improve the value of the reports, f
Summary
The NSE activities appeared to be well documented, with followup on identified concerns and recommendations being found to be effective.
Minor improvements could be made in regard to providing a fuller description of NSE activities in procedures and more clearly describing in reports the significance of and resolution of plant tour observations.
.Ho' violations or deviations were identified in this area of the
inspection.
4.
Exit Meeting i
An exit meeting was held on December 1, 1989, with those individuals denoted in paragraph 1 of this report. At this meeting, the scope of the inspection and the findings were summarized. The licensee did not
,
,
identify as proprietary any of the information provided to, or reviewed by the inspector.
+
.
-
.