ML20198C502

Forwards Draft NRR Input to SALP Evaluation for Jul 1984 - Oct 1985.Review & Comments Received by 851112 Will Be Considered in Final Rept

ML20198C502
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	11/07/1985
From:	Sears P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bernero R, Knight J, Thompson H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8511120104
Download: ML20198C502 (10)

Text

. . ,

November 7, 1985 Docket No. 50-309 DISTRIBUTION:

Docket f1)e4 MEMORANDUM FOR: Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Director NRC PDR Division of Licensing L PDR ORB #3 Rdg Robert M. Bernero, Director GClainas Division of Systems Integration EJButcher PMKreutzer James P. Knight, Acting Director Division of Engineering William T. Johnston, Acting Director Division of Human Factors Safety Themis P. Spets, Director i Division of Safety Technology 4

THRU: Edward J. Butcher, Acting Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3

[

Division of Licensing Gus C. Lainas, Assistant Director r for Operating Reactors Division of Licensing FROM: Patrick M. Sears, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing

SUBJECT:

DRAFT NRR SALP INPUT FOR MAINE YANKEE Enclosed is a draft of the NRR input to the SALP review for Maine Yankee.

The draft report is based partly upon input from selected staff personnel who have substantial contact and involvement with Maine Yankee licensing material. Please review the draft evaluation and provide any comments you feel appropriate. In particular, any comments from your reviewers who are currently doing work on fire protection for Maine Yankee will be appreciated. '

All connents received by November 12, 1985 will be considered in the final i report. Your coments may be provided verbally due to the short turn-around

' time. Please note that the licensee was evaluated to be a. Category 2.

ii 7 /s/

i Patrick M. Sears, Project Manager ppR l

k120104hoo0309 o

ADOCK Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing l

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure -

l L. S. Rubenstein ORB #$:DL ORB #3:DL ORB #3 OR I e6tzer PSears:dd EJBu4her GC ainas l PVg/c/85 ly 19/ 4 /85 10/b/85 10/f/85 l

Enclosure 1 Detailed Review - Licensing Activities i

Facility Name: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant .

i Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company Evaluation Period: July 1, 1984 to October 31, 1985 i NRR Project Manager: Patrick Sears I. INTRODUCTION This report represents the results of an evaluation of the licensee in the functional area of " Licensing Activities." It is intended to provide NRR's input to the SALP review process as described in NRR Office Letter No. 44

- dated January 3,1984, and NRC Manual Chapter 0516.

II.

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS i NRC Manual Chapter 0516 specifies that each functional area evaluated will be assigned a performance category (category 1, 2, or 3) based on a composite of a number of attributes. The performance of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company is rated category 2.

III. CRITERIA The evaluation criteria used in this assessment are given in NRC Manual Chapter 1

0516 Appendix, Table 1, Evaluation Criteria with Attributes for Assessment of Licensee Perfomance.

IV. METHODOLOGY This evaluation represents the integrated inputs of the Operating Reactor Project Manager (ORPM) and those technical reviewers who expended significant amounts l of effort on Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant licensing actions during the current rating period. Using the guidelines of NRC Manual Chapter 0516, the l ORPM and each reviewer applied specific evaluations to the relevant licensee

. perforinance criteria, as delineated in Chapter 0516, and assigned an overall rating category (1, 2 or 3) to each criterion. The reviewers included this inforination as part of each Safety Evaluation Report transmitted to the Division of Licensing. The ORPM, after reviewing inputs of the technical reviewers, com-bined this infomation with his own assessment of the licensee performance and, using appropriate weighting factors, arrived at a composite rating for the licensee. This rating alsc reflected the coments of the NRR Senior Executive assigned to the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant SALP assessment. A written evaluation was then prepared by the ORPM and circulated to NRR management for coments.

i l

i. . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . , _ . _ , , _ _ , . _ _ _ . , _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

The basis for this appraisal was the licensee's performance in support of licensing actions that were completed during the current rating period.

These actions consisted of amendment requests, exemption requests, responses to generic letters, TMI items and other actions and are as follows:

Licensing Action TAC Number Seismic & Other Qualifications 52173 on 8" Vent / Purge Valve Emergency Exercise Exemption Request 54431 Appendix I Tech Spec Implement Review 07752 Environmental Qualification of Safety 42490 Related Electric Equipment Seismic Qualification of AFW System 43653 Fire Protection 48582 Appendix J Tech Spec Change 48632 Detailed Control Room Design 51173 Review Program 2nd ISI Interval 52011 Control of Heavy Loads 52241 Post Trip Review Program 52277 Description & Procedures ,

Preventive Maintenance Program 52130 Reactor Trip Breakers Fire Protection-Extra 53408 Exemption Requests Revised Definition of 53449 Containment Integrity Tech Specs Covered By 54543

, Generic Letters 83-36 & 83-37 (0737)

Thermal Shield Inspection 54958 and Repair

Licensing Action TAC Number LTOP 54959 Neutron Source Data for 55044 Flux Reduction Verification Cask In Spent Fuel Pool 55092 Proposed Change 105 55296 Power Supplies For Safe Shutdown 56099 CEA Ejection Analysis 56775 Revised Confirmatory Order 56818 Backfit Determination 58016

- 'For AFWS Turbine Driven Pump -

Backfit Determination - Testing 58017 Frequency of Auto Initiation Logic Emergency Feedwater Pump Cycle 9 Core Performance 58031 Tech Specs V. ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE The licensee's performance evaluation is based on a consideration of five of the seven criteria specified in NRC Manual Chapter 0516. These are:  ;

Management Involvement and Control in Assuring Quality

- Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint

- Responsiveness to NRC Initiatives

- Staffing Reportable Events In addition to the above, Housekeeping and Control Room Behavior are also discussed.

Fortheremainingtwocriteria(enforcementandtraining),nobasisexists for an NRR evaluation for the functional area of Licensing Activities for Maine Yankee. Conversations with the Resident Inspector at Maine Yankee indicate an overall rating of Category 2 for these two criteria.

l A. Management Involvement and Control in Assuring Quality During the present rating period the licensee's management demonstrated active participation in licensing activities and kept abreast of all current and anticipated actions. During the review of Item II.B.3.2 of NUREG-0737, " Post Accident Sampling Modification," there was consistent evidence of prior planning and assignment of priorities. Certain other submittals, for example " Steam Tube Surveillance", submittals were not complete in the original and as a con-sequence time was lost unnecessarily. In general, submittals reflect good quality and proper management control to assure quality. The timeliness of however fails to receive proper prioritization and quite often such submittals are late. In particular responses to staff questions should receive more management control to assure timely submittals. The technical reviewers, overall, have rated the licensee close to 2 in this category for reviews com-pleted during this SALP period.

On the basis of these observations and reviewer input, a rating of Category 2 is

- assigned to this criterion.

B. Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint The licensee's management and its staff have demonstrated technical understanding of issues involving licensing actions. For the majority of licensing actions, the licensee's submittals are technically sound, thorough, and well referenced.

They generally exhibit conservatism when considering safety significance, how-ever resolutions are quite often delayed. During the review of the Cycle 9 Core Perfonnance Technical Specification changes, the licensee was very responsive to questions posed by the reviewer. The reviewers, overall, have rated the licensee very close to 2 in this category for reviews completed during this SALP period.

On the basis of these observations and reviewer input, a rating of Category 2 is I assigned to this criterion.

C. Responsiveness to NRC Initiatives The licensee's responsiveness appears to vary widely on different technical issues. For example, the submittal concerning the technical specification change on snubbers was significantly delayed by the licensee. The resubmittal concerning Technical Specifications for Limiting Overtime is approximately four months over-due because of staffing problems. Other actions such as Environmental Qualifica-tion of Safety Related Electrical Equipment, Detailed Control Room Design Review and Main Steam Line Break Report had no timeliness problems.

The technical reviewers have rated the licensee close to an overall 2 in this category.

Based on the above observations and reviewer input, a rating of Category 2 is assigned to this criterion.

i  :

j D. Reporting and Analysis of Reportable Events I

i The licensee has been prompt and open in reporting reportable events. For example, several Rosemont Transmitters were found not to have been installed in complete agreement with the equipment qualification test configuration.

The licensee promptly reported the condition, searched for like conditions and j brought the installation of the transmitters into agreement with the equipment

qualification test configuration. In remedying the installation, however, the licensee did ask the question "what would have been the consequences of this l

situation had it gone undiscovered and a design accident occurred." Thus the

! analysis was left to much later when the imediate circumstances were not repro-

! ducible.

Based on the above, a rating of Category 2 is assigned this criterion.

E. Staffing

! During the appraisal period the licensee rotated two licensing staff personnel l who were directly involved with Maine Yankee. In the NRC project manager's j -- judgement it was the perturbation caused by these losses which caused some of -

the delay in responding to NRC. The licensee's current level of staff appears j to be adequate and the caliber of personnel is excellent. i i

Based on the above considerations only, the rating of Category 2 is assigned j to this criterion.

F. Housekeeping and Control Room Behavior  ;

I Housekeeping and Control Room Behavior is a functional area that is dicusssed i elsewhere in the NRC evaluation. However NRR has continuing interest in this area since good housekeeping practices and formal behaviors within the control

! room indicate that the licensee and its employees take pride in their facilities

and in their jobs. During site visits, it has been observed that an orderly and

+

clean working environment is maintained, which indicates good housekeeping practices. Operations personnel have exhibited professional behavior with the

, control room clean and orderly. During a fueling outage, it appeared that the usual construction / modification clutter was being kept to a minimum.

t l Overall rating for this criterion is Category 1.

! V. Conclusion In general, the licensing functions for Maine Yankee are carried out in an adequate manner. Better coordination of licensing activities to avoid late i responses should be pursued. While there were delays in getting responses l to some licensing actions, the licensee exhibits a willingness to be respon-l sive and to improve perfonnance.

The time (3 months) allowed for fuel reload submittals is critical. Any '

j staff concerns must be resolved in a pressure type atmosphere. Because

of this it is strongly recomended that reload submittals be filed at least 5 months prior to projected restart after a reload outage.

A complete performance rating of Category 2 has been assigned by the NRR SALP ~

j evaluational effort for the current rating period.

I a

k l W

t i

e I

1

, I I

i s

k i

. 4.-

Enclosure 2 SALP EVALUATION FOR .

MAINE YANKEE AYUMTC POWER STATION .

SUPPORTING DATA AND

SUMMARY

1. NRR LICENSEE MEETINGS November 28, 1984 Reactor Coolant Pump Trip Discussion February 5,1985 Seismic Design Review February 6,1985 Briefing for Incoming Director of Division of Licensing on Status of Maine Yankee February 7, 1985 Discussion of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS)

~~

February 12, 1985 Discussion of Emergency Operating Procedures February 14, 1985 Discussion of Small Break LOCA and RCP Trip Modeling March 11, 1985 Discussion of Fire Protection Issues at Maine Yankee March 11, 1985 Discussion of Low Level Waste Management at Maine Yankee March 14, 1985 Further Discussion of RETS March 18, 1985 Meeting with Florida Public Counsel Concerning Thernal Shield at Maine Yankee May 8, 1985 Discussions Concerning Offsite Power Supplies August 12, 1985 Maine Yankee Generic Fuel Load Presentation August 22, 1985 Management Meeting Concerning Maine Yankee Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Backfit Claim

(

~

t s > 1 September 20, 1985 Maine Yankee Presentation Concerning Two Common Mode Problems with Steam Generator Pressure Indication

2. NRR SITE VISITS .

October 30 31, 1984 Management Meeting November 9, 1984 SALP Meeting With Licensee January 16-17, 1985 RETS Meeting March 13-14, 1985 Final RETS Meeting June 7-8, 1985 Plant Familiarization September 18-19, 1985 Concrete Block Wall Inspection

3. COMMISSION BRIEFINGS

- None 1 -

4. SCHEDULAR EXTENSIONS GRANTED None 5.

RELIEFS GRANTED None

6. EXEMPTIONS GRANTED None .

7. LICENSE AMENDMENTS ISSUED License Amendment No. 79 Technical Specifications (TS) Modification concerning Manning of Shift and License Event Reporting License Amendment No. 80 TS Modification to Ensure Containment Integrity License Amendment No. 81 TS Modificatita Concerning Operational Safety Instrumentation, Control Systems, and Accident Monitoring Systems License Amendment No. 82 TS Modification Concerning Reactor Containment Integrity l

l l

l ':

License Amendment No. 83 TS Changes concerning Modifications to add a Variable Setpoint to the Low Temparature Overpressure Protection System. -

License Amendment No. 84 TS Changes to require more extensive-inspection of Steam Generator Tubes in Critical Areas.

License Amendment No. 85 TS Changes to Reflect Power Distributions, Insertion Limits, Peaking Factors, and other characteristics for Cycle 9 Fuel Reload.

8. EMERGENCY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ISSUED None

9. ORDERS ISSUED Order Confirming revisions to Licensee commitments to implement Post TMI related items set forth in NUREG-0737 Supplement 1.

10. Exemptions Granted Exemption granted for compliance to a certain requirenent of Subsection III.G.2 of Appendix R to 10 CFR 50 concerning separation in the Reactor Containment Incore Instrumentation Area & Lower Pressurizer Cubicle.

i i

.__