IR 05000482/1997017
| ML20198N354 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1997 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198N352 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-97-17, NUDOCS 9711040053 | |
| Download: ML20198N354 (12) | |
Text
.-
..
_
- -.
-.
- - - -
. - _.
..-
.-
,
. ENCLOSURE'i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- REGION IV Docket No.:
'50-482 License No.:
NPF-42 Report No.:
50-482/97-17 Licensee:
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Facility:
Wolf Creek Generating Station Location:
1550 Oxen Lane, NE Burlington, Kansas Dates:
- September 29 through October 10,1997 Inspectors:
Claude E. Johnson, Senior Reactor Irjspector, Maintenance 3 ranch William M. McNeill, Reactor inspector, Maintenance Branch Accompanying,- Brad Smalldridge, Resident inspector, Project Dranch B Personnel:
Approved By:
Dr. Dale A. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Branch Division of Reactor Safety ATTACHMENT:
Supplemental Information
,
9711040053 971029
'
PDR ADOCK 05000482 G
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
_ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ - - -
'
y
-.2-
__
_
.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wolf Creek Generating Station --
NRC Inspection Report 50-482/97_17 This inspection was performed to determine how the licensee used risk information'in the.
)
planning proce's, inspection followup, and whether the inservice inspection at Wolf Creek-
s
- Generating Station was performed in accordance with _ Technical Specifications, the applicable ASME Code, corcespondence between NRC and the licer see.
Maintenance
- -
The licensee had identified many Maintenance Rule program implementation -
problems (Section M1.1).
No formal training on the Maintenance Rule had been given to the integrated plant
- -
}.
scheduling organization's staff (Section M1.11.
A few maintenance activities were reviewed, and the planning was found to be
proper and effective (Section M1.1).
The licensee had established a well developed inservice inspection program plan in
- that all components to be examined including augmented inspection requirements were clearly delineated by component identification, period to be inspected, and the method of the nondestructive examination (Section M1.2).
Inservice inspection procedures were adequate (Section M3).
- -
Nondestructive examinations observed were performed in accordance with
procedures and by knowledgeable contractor nondestructive examination personnel (Section M4.1).
Records indicated that contractor nondestructive examination personnel were
properly certified in accordance with ASME Code requirements (M4.2).
<
-
__
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _
.
.
.
3-i Bggstt Details Summarv of Plant Status The olant was at full power during the first week (November 29 through October 3,1997)
of the inspection. The plant was in Mode 5, Refueling Outage 9, the second week (October 6-10, 1997) of the inspection.
II. Maintenanqa M1 Conduct of Maintenance l-M 1.1 Maintenance Plannina Revieu
!
a.
Insnection Scoce (627001 l
I The inspecto:s reviewed the planning of maintenance activities. Particular interest was in how the licensee used risk information in the planning process and for emergent work. The inspectors reviewed the training of the individuals whose task was to merge risk information into the planning process. The irspectors reviewed the control room logs to identify risk significant evolutions involving emergent work, b.
Observations and Findinos The inspectors found that the licensee controlled all work (except extremely minor maintenance) with a " Work Package Task." The integrated plant scheduling group merged the risk of activities or emergent work into planning. Two procedures that governed merging of risk were AP 22C-003, " Operational Risk Assessment," and AP 30-120, " Outage Risk Management." The maintenance role coordinator gave informal training to the staff and the integrated plant scheduling organization regarding the assessment of risk as required by Procedures AP 22C-003 and AP 30-120.
A recent avent of risk significance was the discovery during reviews prompted by NRC Ger.eric Letter 96-01, " Testing of Safety-Related Logic Circuits," that certain contacts of the load shedding and r aquencing systems were not tested. Technical Specifications required demonstration of the operability of these contacts and associated relays. Design of the load shedding and sequencing system was to include a time delay in adding pumps (component cooling water, essential service water and motor driven auxiliary feedwater) to the emergency busses after an emergency diesel generator start. This enlergent condition (the contacts were considered inoperable until tested) caused an increase of one order of magnitude in the risk of core damage. The licensee documented this condition, as required by procedure, on the " Risk Significant Contingency Plan" for that week. Through
,
_
- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
- - _ _ _ _ _
..
I'\\..
.,
-4a t
review of the control room logs, the inspectors verified that no additional risk significant evolutions occurred until the contacts were tested and determined operable. The inspectors determined that the planning of maintenance activities -
was proper and effective.
,
The inspectors established that the apparent reason for the lack of formal training on I
the Maintenance Rule was because of the changing character of the licensee's i present program. The changing character of the present program was because of l
b= many problems and subsequent changes to the program to correct the problems.
_
L For example, sirme January 1,1997, the licensee's staff wrote 26 performance improvement requests (PIRs) on programmatic problems with the Maintenance Rule
!.
implementation. Subsequently, the licensee's staff documented the identification of
an adverse trend in PIR 97-0204'early in 1997. The licensee has written other PIRs l
since PIR 97-0204 on significant problems such as PIR 97-2305 on the failure to
.
[.
implement a structure monitoring program. In' addition, the licensee wrote l
PIR 97 2032 on a trend of not properly evaluating maintenance preventabis i
functional failures. These multiple and extensive failures of the Maintenance
!
. Rule program implementation were licensee-identified, and the licensee has taker.
some corrective actions to eliminate the problems. The review of the licensee's
'-
(
PIRs 97-0204,97 2032 and 97 2305 will be an inspection followup item (50-482/9717-01).
c.
Conclusions i
The planning of' maintenance activities was proper and effective. No formal training on the Maintenance Rule had been given to the integrated plant scheduling organization's staff. The licensee had identified many problems _with the Maintenance Rule program implementation, and the inspectors identified this as an inspection followup item (50-482/9717-01).
M1.2 Inservice Insnection Proaram Review a.
Insoection Scoce (73753)
.
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's document WCRE 10, "Second Interval inservice inspection Program Plan," Revision 0, relief requests submitted, and Code cases implemented. In addition, the inspectors reviewed selected examination records from the first 10 Year Interval to determine if the licensee had subnatted a
_ relief request when less than 90 percent of any weld examination could not be accomplished. (This was performed in follow up to a generic concern that some licensees might not be complying with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(a)(3) and (g)(5).)
'
_
/
.
E'
.
-5-
,
b.
Observations and Findinas The inspectors found that the' Inservice inspection Program at Wolf Creek Generating Station implemented the requirements of the 1989 Edition of Section XI s
of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Code with no addenda. The inspectors found that program changes (96-01, 96-02, 97-01, 97 02, and 97-03) were properly documented on document change forms. The Program Plan documented both inservice inspections and augmented laspections to be performed, by inspection period, and the method of nondestructive examination to be performed. The
,
licensee had clearly identified in the Second 10-Year Interval Program Plan, relief requests submitted and Code cases implemented. The program was detailed and appeared complete,
,
The inspectors randomly selected records from the following Class 1 ASME Code Categories: B1.10, B1.11, B1.12, B2.10, B2.11, B2.12, and B3.11, to determine if 90 percent of full coverage of the weld examinations were accomplished. The inspectors determined through review of these examination records for the Code categories selected, that the licensee had properly examined or had submitted relief
,
requests on weld examinations that had less than 90 percent full examination coverage inspection records selected for review were found to be complete.
c.
Conclusicos Overall, the licensee had established a well developed inservice inspection program plan in that components to be examined, including augmented inspection requirements, were clearly delineated by component identification, period to be inspected, and the method of the nondestructive examination to be performed. The program plan was detailed and appeared complete. Inservice inspection records selected for review for the First 10-Year Interval were also complete.
'
M3 Maintenance Procedures cnd Documentation a.
Insoection Scone (73753)
The inspectors reviewed the nondestructive examination procedures identified below to determine if these documents had been developed m accordance with regult. tory requirements and the applicable ASME code requirements.
Procedure 83A6237, ' Ultrasonic Examination Of Vessel Welds Greater Then Two inches in Thickness," Revision 1 Procedure 83A1721, " Liquid Penetrant Examination," Revision 8 o
-.
,
-
.
- -.
._.
-
.
-. _ - - -
-
.
-
.
.
t
.
-6-a Procedure _83A2417, "l'ltrasonic Examination'Of Vessel Welds Less Than or Equal to Two Inches in Thickness," Revision 6
Procedure 83A1722, " Magnetic Particle Examination," Revision 9 e
Procedure ENG 03-501, "Use And Maintenance Of Ultrasonic Calibration Block,"
Revision 7 b.-
Observations and Findings
,
a During the procedure review, the inspectors noted a discrepancy between
_ Procedure 83A1721 and Section V, paragraph T-641 of the 1989 ASME Code.
.
The discrepancy related to the temperature of the penetrant and surface of the part to be examined for liquid penetrant examination. Procedure 83A1722 requires that
,
the surface temperature to be examined not be below 41 degrees nor above
j 125 degrees Fahrenheit throughout the examination. The Code requires that the surface temperature to be examined not be below 60 deg,rees nor above
_
125 degrees Fahrenheit throughout the examination. However, the Code also states
,
where it is not practical to comply with these temperature limitations, other temperatures may be used, provided the procedures are qualified. Discussions with
'
the inservice inspection coordinator indicated that the proceduro had been qualified for use. The inspectors requested the qualification data for Procedure 83A1721.
After reviewing the procedure qualification data, the inspectors determined that the
'
procedure was adequate for use in the revised temperature range. _ The inspectors
[
determined that nondestructive procedores and a procedure qualification were
~
adequate.
c.
Conclusions
The inspectors concluded that the inservice inspection procedures were adequate.
The inspectors also concluded that the licensee had adequately qualified the revised
_ temperature range for a liquid penetrant procedure in accordance w,th Code
- requirements.
.
$
M4-Maintenance Staff Knowledge and Performance M4.1 Contractor Nondestructive Examination Personnel
a.
Insoection Scoce (73753)
The inspectors observed contractor nondestructive axamination personnel perform calibrations of ultrasonic equipment. and perform ncndestructive exami ations of ASME Co'de welds. The inspectors assessed licensoe and contractor personnel knowledge and performance in this area.
.
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
..
..
.
.
!
i l
b.
Qbservations and Findinos The inspectors observed the licensee's inservice inspection coordinator brief contractor nondestructive examination personnel on site procedural requirements, radiation work permits, and job conditions. The inspectors ot. served nondestructive examination personnel perform ultrasonic examinations on the following ASME Code welds:
AE 04 SO22-B, AE-04 SO22 A, AE 04+039, AE 05 F038, AE-04-S023 A, AE 04 S023 0, and AB-01 F081 The inspectors noted two (,bservations during the examinations discussed below.
AE 05-F038: The surface temperature of the component was not taken at the initial start of the examination; however, after questioning by the inspectors, the temperature gage was immediately placed on the surface of the component being examined. Procedure 83A2417 requires the calibration block surface temperature to be within 25 degrees Fahrenheit of the component to be examined. The inspectors determined that no procedural violation occurred.
AB-01-F081: A flashlight was not in the possession of tha nordestructive examination personnel during the examination of this weld, which was in a poorly lighted area. The inspectors determmed, howe ser, tnat there was sufficient light to perform the ultrasonic examination.
The above observations were discussed with the licensee's inservi v inspection coordinator and the contractor supervisor. These observations were, in turn, discussed with the nondestructive examination personnel by the contracter supervisor. The inspectors did not observe any similar work practices on subsequent nondestructive examinations The inspectors observed during the ultrr40n::: examinations that the nondestructive examination personnel used proper scanning mchniques. The indications that were identified were properly recorded and mapped by the nondestructive examination personnel. The inspectors also verified thct equipment used during the conduct of the examinations were current in their calibrations.
Overall, the nondestructive examinations observed were conducted in accordance with procedures, and nondestructive examination personnel were knowledgeable of their requirement.
.
8-c.
Conclusions The inspectors concluded that nondestructive examinations were performed in accordance with procedures and by knowledgeable contractor nondestructive examination personnel.
M4.2 Beview of Contractor Inservice Insnection Certifications
{
l a.
laspection Scope (737E3J l
l The inspectors reviewed the contractor's inservice inspection personnel qualifications and certifications, b.
Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed the contractor's (NES Inc.) inservice inspection personnel certificetion records of Level 1,11, and lll tachnicians. The records contained appropriatti documentation such as annual vision acuity examination, work experience, education and trainireg records, and examination results for each nondestructive examination certified technician. The records were current and legible.
c.
Conclusions The inspectors found that the contractor nondestructive examination personnel were properly certified and qualified in accordance with ASME Code requirements.
M8 Miscellaneous Maintenance issues (92002)
M8.1 (Closed) insoection Followun item 50 482/9507-03: A review of the licensee's actions to investigate the steam-driven auxiliary foodwater pump turbine trip linkage engagement to enhance operator training. The inspectors verified that the licensee's staff investigated the linkage engagement and enhanced operator training. The inspectors identified no additional problems.
M8.2 (Ocen) Insoection Followun item 50-482/9606-01: A review of the licensee's root cause analysis of the H38 fuel assembly damage. The inspectors verified that the licensee's staff established a root caust and implemented corrective actions as
.
.
.
f
!
'
t i
described in the performance improvement request on this problem. However, this i
item will remain open until funner followup, based on NRC questions concerning the material property behavior identified in the performance improvement request by the licensee.
!
!
MB.3 (Closed) Violation 50-482/9705 0D A condition adverse to quality involving the
'
sample flow through the compot'.ent cooling water heat exchanger radiation monitor j
being repeatedly off scale low. The inspectors verified the corrective actions
described in the licensee's response letter, dated April 24,1997, to be reasonable l
and complete. No similar problems were identified.
t lli. ' Engineering
!
E2 Engineering Support of Facilities und Equipment f
E2.3 Review of Fina! Safety Analvnis Rooort Commitments A recent discovery of a licensee operating their f acility in a manner contrary to their i
Final Safety Analysis Report description highlighted the need for a special focused
{
review that compares plant practices, procedures, and/or parameters to the Final Safety Analysis Report descriptions.
-
The inspectors identified that Section 5.2.4,1 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report had not been updated to reflect the licensee's current use of the 1989 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Code. The licensee's representative informed the inspectors that this change had been submitted previously, but apparently had been inadvertently omitted. Performance improvement Request 97-3114 was initiated to track and correct this oversight.
l V. Management Meetings I
X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of each portion of the inspection on October 3 and 10,1997. The licensee personnel ackncwledged the findings presented. The inspectors asked the licensee personnel whether any materials exsmined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.
}
i
4 u
d u.
, - - - - -- - -wg
-
,,m,-.e,
,+c
.
v.+~m
,,r._...,u
, - -, _. -74.w
,,
..,m._m.wv.,3..-.r--.m.,y
,m,.mw,,4,
.v-+
-%.-
,,_, -,,.-,m m
.,
g-
., - + -- - +
v-y-
.,
, - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _..___ _______ _ - __ _ ________ _ _
.
ATTACHMERT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee M. Angus, Manager, Licensing and Corrective Actions T. Anselmi, Supervisor, Program Engineers A. Critchley, Assistant to the Chief Administrative Officer T. Damashek, Supervisor, Licensing R. Flannigan, Manager, Nuclear Engineering C. Fowler, hnanager, integrated Plant Schedu!ing R. Gimple, Technical Staff Engineer W. Goshorn, Wolf Creek Coordinator S. Hatch, Licensing Engineer N. Hoadley, Manager, Support Engineering O. Maynard, President and Chief Executive Officer B. McKinney, Plant Manager
D. Moore, Manager, Maintenance R. Muench, Vice President, Eng'7eering
,
E. Peterson, Supervisor, Quality Control
'
J. Pippin, Manager. Training R. Sims, Manager, System Engineering S. Sprague, Welding Engineer, Maintenance
'
L. Stevens, Supervisor, Nuclear Safety Engineering C. Warren, Operations Vice President
,
C. Younie, Manager, Operations
Contractrg_INES Inc.)
S. Larson, Supervisor, Inservice Inspection l
MBC F. Ringwald, Senior Resident inspector
,.
-
, _ _.
.
_..
_, _. _ _
- -.
,. -. _
_. _
.
.
.
.
.
.
\\
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED J
IP 62700 Maintenance Program implementation IP 73753 Inservice inspection ITEMS OPENED, DISCUSSED, AND CLOSED Ooened i
50 482/9717-01 IFl Review of performance improvement requests on the Maintenance Rule Program implementation (Section M1.b)
i l
Discussed
[
50 482/9606 01 IFl Review of the Licensee's Root Cause Analysis of the H38 Fuel Assembly Damage (Section MB.2)
Closed 50-482/9507 03 IFl Review of Terry Turbine Trip Linkage Engagement to Enhance Operator Training (Section M8.1)
50 482/9705 01 VIO A Condition Adverse to Quality involving the Sample Flows Being Repeatedly Off Scale Low (Section M8.3)
LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED Performance Imorovement Reauests 97 2710, Procedure Conflicts 97 2032, Maintenance Rule Program 97 0204, Maintenance Rule Program 97-0457, Sample Flow Rates 96 1801, Turbine Overspeed Trip 96 1129, Semple Flow Rates 96 0679, Grid Displacement 95-0999, Turbine Oversptsed Trip 97 3114, Foreign Material Exclusion
_
O-3-i lhcedults Al 16C-003, WPT Writing Guidelines, Revision A AP 16C-002, Work Controls, Revision 5 with On-The Spot Change (OTSC) 97-0411 AP 16C 003, Work Package Task Planning, Revision 4 AP 19C-002, Special Nuclear Material Safeguards and Accountability, Revision 1 with l
OTSC 97 0466
!
AP 22C-002, Work Scheduling During Power Operations, Revision 3 with OTSC 97-0214 AP 22C-003, Operational Risk assessment Program, Revision 1 with OTSC 97 0294 FHP 03 003, Spent Fuel Assembly Handling Tool Operations, Revision 7 with OTSC l
97 0464 STE KE-003, Spent Fuel Bridge Crane Surveillance Test,12 with OTSC 97-0030 SYS AL 103, TDAFW Pump Inservice Pump Test, Revision 30 SYS AL-123, TDAFW Pump Post Maintenance Run, Revision 6 SYS EG 120, Component Cooling Water, Revision 23 SYS KE 003, Spent Fuel Bridge Crane Surveillance Test, Revision 12 AP 12-003, Foreign Material Exclusion, Revision 1 ENG 03 501, Use And Maintenance Of Ultrasonic Calibration Block, Revision 7 Trainino Plans and Attendance Records LR 10 000 03, Turbine Driven Aux Feed Pump PIR, Revision 1 LR 10108 67, Plant and Industry Events, Cycle 95 5, Revision 0 NO 16 06100, Auxiliary Feedwater System, Revision 2 SO 14 06100, Auxiliary Feedwater System, Revision 6 Calculations EG M 028, CCW Radiation Monitor Sample Flow Rates, Revision 0 EG-M 029, CCW Radiation Monitor Flow Orifice, Revision 0 M-EG 13, Component Cooling Water Radiation Monitor Flow Orifice, Revision 1
.
l t
,
AN 97-0M Risk Information in Support of Relay Contact REED, Draf t SA 90-Obo, Electrical Power System's Notebook, Revision 1 Miscellaneops Documents USAR Change Request 95111, 97162, and 97186
. Photos of operator aides Maintenance Information Bulletin 79 incident investigation Team Report 96 004
- Logs of the Control Room, Shif t Engineer, and Shif t Supervisor from September 3 to 6,
-1997-
" Risk Significant Contingency Plans" for weeks 309 to 313 Training materials on 10 CFR 50.65 (a)(3)
NES Nondestructive Personnel Cortifications (6)
. Code Case N 532 Keyword Printout'of 32 PIRs from January 1,1997, on Maintenance Rule Relief Raousats
- - _ _
11R 23,11R 24,11R 25,11R 26,11R 27,11R 28,11R 29,11R 30,11R 32,11R 34,11R 36,
-11R 37,11R 38,11R 39
'
Ultrasonic Calibration Data Sheets 24*.7 97 001, 2417 97-002,-2417 97 003, 2417 97 005, 2417 97 0011, 2417 97 00, 2417 97 00, 2417 97 00, 2417 97 00
._
.