ML20198L362

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Repts 50-317/98-10 & 50-318/98-10 on 980706-10 & 1118. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Plant Support with Emphasis on 10CFR50,App R Program,Including Review of Two Open URIs & Licensee Actions in Response to NOV
ML20198L362
Person / Time
Site: Calvert Cliffs  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 12/12/1998
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20198L349 List:
References
50-317-98-10, 50-318-98-10, NUDOCS 9901040176
Download: ML20198L362 (34)


See also: IR 05000317/1998010

Text

___ . _ _ . . _-._ _ . ..

.,-

.. _

.. _

!

i  !

L  !

!~

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION 1

,

Docket Nos: 50-317/50-318

License Nos: DPR-53/DPR-69 i

l

l

-Report Nos: 50-317/98-10,50-318/98-10

i

Licensee: Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BG&E) l

Post Office Box 1475 l

Baltimore, Maryland 21203  !

Facility: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant  ;

Unit 1 and Unit 2 i

i

i

!

Location: Lusby, Maryland l

)

Dates: July 6 - 10,1998 & November 18,1998

Inspector: Keith A. Young, Reactor Engineer

l

- Approved by: David C. Lew, Chief  ;

Electrical Engineering Branch

Division of Reactor Safety

l

i

l

l

l

!

"

9901040176 981212

PDR ADOCK 05000317 '

G PDR

. . - - - . . . . . . . - . . - . . - . - - . - . - . . - - - . - . - . . --

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2

Inspection Report No. 50-317,318/98-10

This inspection included aspects of licensee plant support with emphasis on the 10 CFR

50, Appendix R program. The report covers a five-day announced onsite inspection

conducted by a regional engineering inspector. Additional in-office review was also  ;

conducted by a regional engineering inspector. '

Plant Suooort

. The licensee's Appendix R program self-assessment was of good qualit'.' and was effective ,

in identifying non-compliances and areas for improvement, in response to these findings,

the licensee implemented effective corrective actions, including plant modifications to

motor-operated valve circuits and Appendix R hand switches, and enhancements to

. abnormal operating procedures (AOPs). Appropriate compensatory actions were taken for

_

required changes that were planned, but not yet completed. Additional analyses to review

all cable to cable hot shorts, which could affect the ability of the plant to reach safe

shutdown, was a good initiative. The completion schedule for resolution for identified

issues was appropriate. Resolution of the seven issues outlined in the October 22,1998,

letter to BG&E were adequate. The licensee's Appendix R self assessment identified five

non-compliances. These licensee identified and corrected violations were dispositioned as

L non-cited. (NCV 50-317,318/98-10-01 through 98-10-05) (Section F8.1)

!

.

ii

. . .. ._. - -_ ._. . - . . . .

.._ . _ . _ __ _ _ _ _ . _ .._ - . _ . _ _ . - - . - - - - --

_ 7 ._ ,

--

Report Details

l

IV. Plant Suonort

Backaround

The purpose of this inspection was to review two open unresolved items and the licensee's

actions in response to a Notice of Violation (NOV). The inspector reviewed actions taken

by BG&E to disposition Appendix R self-assessment findings, and control room and

switchgear room fire protection issues.

F8 -Miscellaneous Fire Protection issues

F8.1 (Closed) Unresolved item 50-317,318/97-08-08: Potential for issues identified

during Appendix R self-assessment to be not in compliance with regulatory ,

requirements. The licensee performed a self-assessment of compliance with I

Appendix R in response to escalated enforcement relating to switchgear room

ventilation issues identified in 1996. The inspector reviewed 34 specific issues

identified in the Appendix R self-assessment for regulatory compliance, corrective

actions, compensatory actions, and timeliness of schedule completion.

i'

The inspector found that the licensee had completed comprehensive evaluations for

most of the 34 issues that were identified in their Appendix R self-assessment.

Some evaluations, such as those for the issue of hot shorts, continue to be

performed with an anticipated completion date scheduled for the Spring of 1999.

Where modifications were determined to be necessary, the licensee completed

modifications for Unit 1 in 1998 and scheduled Unit 2 modifications for completion

during the 1999 refueling outage (RFO). Where plant modifications were not -

completed, adequate compensatory measures were in place.

As part of the disposition of this unresolved item, the inspector reviewed the

licensee's Appendix R self-assessment. During this review, the inspector identified

five issues to be violations of regulatory requirernents. In all cases, the licensee

identified and implemented acceptable corrective actions for these issues.

Discussion of these five issues follow:

Anoendix R Emeraency Liaht Units

The licensee had identified a condition in which safe shutdown Appendix R

emergency lighting was inadequate in the Unit 1 main steam isolation valve (MSIV)

room and in the area of the Unit 2 emergency shutdown panel. The licensee

performed blackout tests and instituted modifications to move or add emergency

lights to those areas. During a walkdown of these areas, the inspector verified that

the licensee moved or added emergency lights appropriately and that the lights

illuminated and provided adequate lighting patterns when the " press to test"

buttons were pushed by licensee personnel.

... _ - - - . - - . . - . . - _ . _ - . - - - - . - . - . - - . . . . - -

. 7 3-

l

2

This violation of requirements stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Ill.J, " Emergency

Lighting," is not being cited,'in accordance with Section Vll.B.4 of the General

Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions (Enforcement  ;

Policy) since it was identified by the licensee as part of the corrective action for the i

previous enforcement action, has the same or similar root cause as the violation for

which enforcement action was issued, does not substantially change the safety

significance or character of the regulatory concern arising out of the initial violation

and was or will be corrected, and would not be characterized at a Severity Level 1.

(NCV 50-317,318/98-10-01)

Portable Air Bottles

The licensee identified portable air bottles, used to operate the auxiliary spray valve

'~

(CV-517) to depressurize the reactor coolam <,ystem (RCS) in certain fire scenarios,

were stored in room 529 where their availability would be in question if a fire

occurred in that room. The air bottles are used to depressurize the RCS tb reach

safe shutdown conditions. The inspector found that the licensee evaluated this  ;

condition and completed an issue report to relocate the air bottles to an appropriate

location (69 ft spent fuel pool exhaust room) where they would be retrievable by

operators to depressurize the reactor coolant system, if a fire occurred in room

No. 529. The inspector verified the new location of the air botties during a walk

down of the spent fuel pool exhaust room. The inspector also found that the

licensee changed the appropriate procedure to reflect the new location of the air i

bottles.

l

This violation of requirements stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Ill.L.3, " Alternate

and Dedicated Shutdown Capability," is not being cited, in accordance with

Section Vll.B.4 of the General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC

Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy), since it was identified by the licensee as

pa:t of the corrective action for the previous enforcement action, has the same or

l similar root cause as the violation for which enforcement action was issued, does

l not substantially change the safety significance or character of the regulatory

l concern arising out of the initial violation and was or will be c *cted, and would

j not be characterized at a Severity Level I. (NCV 50 317,318A.d-10-02)

Anoendix R isolation Hand Switches

The licensee identified that Appendix R isolation hand switches (control transfer

switches) installed in the safe shutdown panel were single fused and may not

operate properly in the event that the fuse is blown because of a fire in the control

room. The inspector found that the licensee evaluated this concern against

Information Notice (lN) 85-00, " Isolation Transfer Switches arid Post-Fire Shutdown

L Capability," and issued an engineering package to perform modifications to provide

! dual fusing, such that in the event a remote fault blows a control power fuse when

-

the hand switch is in " Local," control power will still be available to the circuit. The

'

licensee _ issued an engineering package, which the inspector found acceptable, to

modify the hand switch circuits accordingly. The inspector noted that the

j. modifications had been completed for Unit 1 during the 1998 RFO and Unit 2

l

. .

l

l

l 3

modifications had been scheduled to be completed during the 1999 RFO. The

inspector also noted that the licensee had implemented appropriate compensatory

actions for Unit 2 until the modifications are completed.

This violation of requirements stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Ill.L.3, " Alternate l

and Dedicated Shutdown Capability," is not being cited, in accordance with I

Section Vll.B.4 of the General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC

Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy) since it was identified by the licensee as

part of the corrective action for the previous enforcement action, has the same or

similar root cause as the violation for which enforcement action was issued, does I

not substantially change the safety significance or character of the regulatory

concern arising out of the initial violation and was or will be corrected, and would

not be characterized at s Severity Level I. (NCV 50 317,318/98-10-03)

Motor-Ocerated Valve (MOV) Issues

The licensee had identified a condition which could cause a hot short in MOV

control cables that would bypass MOV limit switches, cause spurious operation,

and potentially damage the valve. The inspector found that the licensee evaluated

this issue against IN 92-18, " Potential for Loss of Remote Shutdown Capability

During a Control Room Fire, and Generic Letter (GL) 89-10, Safety Related Motor-

Operated Valve Testing and Surveillance," ultimately determining, that modifications

were necessary for MOVs needed for safe shutdown. The licensee had issued an

acceptable engineering package to modify thirty-two MOVs for Unit 1 and Unit 2.

The modifications to the MOVs consisted of rewiring Appendix R circuits at the

motor control centers in accordance with the recommendations of IN 92-18 and

replacement of MOV hand switches for circuits affected by shorts in the limit

switch cable. The inspector verified that the modifications had been completed for

Unit 1 during the 1998 RFO and Unit 2 had been scheduled to be completed during

the 1999 RFO. The inspector noted that appropriate compensatory actions were in

place for Unit 2 until the modifications are completed. The compensatory actions

implemented consisted of controls of hot work and transient combustible

walkoowns or fire watches.

This violation of requirements stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Ill.G.1.a, " Fire

Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability," is not being cited, in accordance with

Section Vll.B.4 of the General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC

Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy) since it was identified by the licensee as

part of the corrective action for the previous enforcement action, has the same or

similar root cause as the violabon for which enforcement action was issued, does

not substantially change the safety significance or character of the regulatory

concern arising out of the initial violation and was or will be corrected, and would

not be characterized at a Severity LevelI. (NCV 50-317,318/98-10-04)

. - - .- - - . . .- -

4

Accendix R Self-Assessment Topics

Further review of the licensee's Appendix R self-assessment by regional

management resulted in additional questions on seven of the issues. On 1

November 18,1998, a meeting was held at NRC headquarters with BG&E, the  !

Plant Systems Branch, NRR, and the Electrical Engineering Branch, Region I, to

discuss / resolve the seven issues identified in an October 22,1998, letter to the

licensee. The information presented at this meeting is provided as an enclosure to

this inspection report. The topics and resolution of these topics are documented

below.

External Hot Shorts

The Appendix R self-assessment report recommended that BG&E re-evaluate l

Appendix R safe shutdown component circuits and consider all single external hot

short cable faults.

BG&E's original Appendix R design approach assumed hot shorts between

conductors within a cable and multiple cables for high/ low pressure interfaces only.

The inspector reviewed the safety evaluation report (September 27,1982) and  ;

!

concluded that the licensing basis appeared not to require the licensee to consider

all external hot short in their analysis. Therefore, no violation of NRC requirements

occurred.

!

However, as an enhancement, the licensee instituted a plan to perform cable to

cable hot short analysis including all cables that could affect safe shutdown. BG&E

had planned to consider all spurious actuations as part of this analysis. The

'

licensee expected to complete the analysis for this task by January 1999. This

would include istuance of a new interactive cable analysis and revision to their

AOP-09 procedures. The NRC staff concluded that the actions taken by the

licensee were acceptable.

Reoortability

i

The Appendix R self-assessment report recommended that the reportability of

, potential Appendix R non-conformance be re-evaluated.

1

BG&E identified an example of an Appendix R reportable issue in their Appendix R

self-assessment. In the example, BG&E determined that the RCS/LPSI suction

valves (MOV-651 and 652) could open based on a postulated fire in several

locations since the breaker for at least one of the valves in series had not been

placed in the "OFF" position during normal plant operation. This is a condition that

would not meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, section Ill.G.1.a, " Fire

Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability," thus placing the plant outside of its design

basis. This failure is further discussed in the high/ low pressure interface section of

this report. The inspector concluded that this condition was reportable under

10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(ii).

1

-

l

l

- - --- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --

-

. ,

5

The licensee stated that NUREG 1022," Event Reporting Systems 10 CFR 50.72

and 50.73," revision 0, did not provide specific guidance on the definition of,

"outside the design basis of the plant" and that their reportability threshold did not

identify Appendix R issues as a reportable condition because they were not

considered a condition, "outside the design basis of the plant." The licensee had

instituted a plan to revise their reportability criteria to meet the guidance outlined in

NUREG 1022, revision 1, stating that this revision includes guidance on what,

"outside the design basis of the plant" means and provides several specific

examples of Appendix R reportable issues. BG&E planned to complete this effort by

the Spring of 1999.

The inspector reviewed GL 86-10 and found reportability was addressed in

paragraph E, " Notification of the NRC when Deficiencies are Discovered" of the

cover letter. GL 86-10 reminds licensees of their obligation to notify the NRC of fire

protection deficiencies which meet the criteria of 10 CFR 50.72 or 10 CFR 50.73 as

applicable. The inspector reviewed NUREG 1022, revision 0, and found that the

guidance given did not provide specific examples of Appendix R reportable issues.

The guidance provided in revision 0 could be interpreted in many ways giving

licensee's leeway to establish their own thresholds. Based on the age of this issue

and the lack of clear guidance given the circumstances, the failure to report the

above condition constitutes a violation of minor significance and is not subject to

formal enforcement action. Based on the review above, the NRC staff concluded

that the actions taken by the licensee to upgrade their reportability criteria using

NUREG 1022, revision 1 was adequate.

Self-Induced Station Blackout

The Appendix R self-assessment report recommended that the self-induced 4 kV

bus blackout actions be re-evaluated and that cooling water (and other plant

supports) needed by the emergency diesel generators (EDGs) should be provided by

performance of plant modifications and/or system lineup procedure changes,

t

BG&E reviewed an issue that occurred at another nuclear facility regarding a

concern that the diesels, if running too long without service water in an Appendix R

scenario, may result in failure. Based on their review, BG&E determined that there

is reasonable assurance that their AOP-9 procedures will protect the originally

installed diesels (1B,2A, and 2B) from this occurrence by shutting them down

when service water is lost under certain post-fire conditions. BG&E determined that

no AC power is needed for 90 minutes and their AOP-9 procedures ensures

operators will restore AC power within 60 minutes. The inspector reviewed a letter

to the NRC from BG&E, dated May 14,1982, describing the action of shutting

down the originally installed diesels to align cooling water. The inspector

determined BG&E's actions were consistent with the wording in the May 14,1982

letter and their licensing basis. The inspector also reviewed the protective functions

listed in the UFSAR for the originally installed diasels and found no functions that

would affect diesel startup once cooling water was aligned. No violations of NRC

requirements were identified. The NRC staff concluded that the actions taken by

the licensee were adequate.

_

_ _ _ __ _ . _ . .. __ _ _ __ . _ _ _ , _ _

,_ __. _ _

,

6

Raceway Enclosure

The Appendix R self-assessment recommended that BG&E re-evaluate the basis for

acceptability of a one-hour conduit enclosure installed on charging pump number 11

power feed (room 115C).

BG&E performed an engineering evaluation of the one-hour fire barrier that encloses

l

conduit containing the number 11 charging pump power cable conduit where it j

traverses the number 13 charging pump room. This evaluation determined that the i

configuration was acceptable and that smoke detection and sprinkler systems in the

area along with low combustible loading ensured that the fire exposure to the

enclosure would be minimal. The inspector verified that smoke detection, sprinkler

systems, and low combustible loading were present where the power cable conduit

traverses the number 13 charging pump room during a walk down of AOP-9

procedures.

The NRC staff was concerned that the configuration was not acceptable with

respect to meeting Appendix R requirements. However, the licensee indicated that,

for a potential fire in the number 13 charging pump room, the number 12 charging

pump would be relied upon to place the plant in safe shutdown. The licensee  ;

indicated that the number 11 charging pump was a redundancy, which they believe l

would be available based upon the above evaluation. The NRC concluded that the

! number 12 charging pump would assure that the plant could be placed in safe

j shutdown for a fire in the number 13 charging pump room, therefore no violations

l

of NRC requirements were identified. The NRC staff concluded that the actions

l taken by the licensee were adequate.

Manual Reoair issues

The Appendix R self-assessment recommended that BG&E re-evaluate the use of

wrenches and fuse pullers (tools) which may constitute a hot shutdown repair.

BG&E has evaluated the issue of manual repairs and had determined that their

licensing basis supports their current approach to achieving hot shutdown. The

inspector reviewed a letter to the NRC dated September 30,1981,in which the

potential of removing fuses and disconnecting air lines from valves by operators

l was described by BG&E. The inspector found that these actions were consistent

with the licensing basis. The inspector also reviewed a previous NRC inspection

report (IR 84-04) and found previous review of operator actions to reach hot

'

shutdown were found to be acceptable. Additionally, BG&E trained their operators

to pull fuses and to break air compression fittings, if necessary. Through these

reviews by the inspector, it appeared that BG&E was within their licensing basis.

,

No violation of NRC requirements were identified. The NRC staff concluded that the

actions taken by the licensee were adequate.

.

l

l

__

~ ~ ~ - ' ~

. .

7

Multiole Hiah Impedance Fault (MHIF) Analysis

The Appendix R self-assessment recommended that BG&E complete an AC and DC

Multiple High impedance Fault analysis.

BG&E had completed calculation 95-0049," Multiple High Impedance Faults-AC

Distribution System," revision 0, and was reviewing calculation CA04043," Multiple

High Impedance Faults - 125 VDC Distribution System," for approval. BG&E had

planned to approve this calculation by the Spring of 1999. The inspector reviewed

BG&E's approach to performing a MHIF analysis and determined that BG&E used a

worst-case bounded approach that considered all shutdown circuits. The inspector

held discussions with NRR staff and Brookhaven National Laboratories personnel to

determine if the bounded methodology approach was acceptable. The NRC staff

concluded that the approach taken by the licensee to perform a bounded MHIF

analysis appeared reasonable and was acceptable.

Hiah/ Low Pressure interface

The Appendix R self-assessment report recommended that BG&E revise procedures

to reflect new breaker configurations for high/ low pressure interfaces. The report

also recommended that a section be added to the interactive cable analysis to

address the basis for exclusion of potential high/ low pressure boundary paths

(e.g., reactor head vents and pressurizer PORVs, etc.).

BG&E had determined that the wording in the self-assessment project plan was

confusing and that they did consider PORVs, Reactor Head Vents, and MOV-651

(one of two Shutdown Cooling Return isolation Valves) as high/ low pressure

interfaces. However, the Appendix R self assessment identified a condition in

which the RCS/LPSI suction valves (MOV-651 and 652) could open based on a

postulated fire, since the breaker for at least one of the valves in series had not

been placed in the "OFF" position during normal plant operation. This is a condition

that would not meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, section Ill.G.1.a,

" Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability." As a result of this finding, BG&E

created an issue report to evaluate this condition. BG&E determined that a change

in operating procedures to lock the MOV-651 breaker open with the valve in the

closed position was necessary to prevent a fire from causing spurious operation of

the valve. BG&E had revised the appropriate procedure to lock the MOV-651

breaker open. BG&E has also revised the appropriate procedure to deenergize both

PORVs by placing their associated breakers to "OFF." The inspector verified these

actions through review of operating procedures and the issue report. The inspector

reviawed the basis for these manual actions and determined that they were taken to

preserve the RCS due to spurious operation of these valves during an Appendix R

! fire scenario. The NRC staff concluded that the manual actions taken by the

licensee were adequate.

< <

l

!

J

8

1

'

This violation of requirements stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Ill.G.1.a, " Fire

Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability,"is not being cited,in accordance with

Section Vll.B.4 of the General Statement of Polic't and Procedures for NRC

Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy) since it was identified by the licensee as

part of the corrective action for the previous enforcement action, has the same or

similar root cause as the violation for which enforcement action was issued, does

not substantially change the safety significance or character of the regulatory

concern arising out of the initial violation and was or will be corrected, and would

not be characterized at a Severity Level I. (NCV 50-317,318/98-10-05)

Conclusion

The licensee's Appendix R program self assessment was of good quality and was

effective in identifying non-compliances and areas for improvement. In response to

these findings, the licensee implemented effective corrective actions, including plant

modifications to motor-operated valve circuits and Appendix R hand switches, and

enhancements to abnormal operating procedures (AOPs). Appropriate

compensatory actions were taken for required changes that were planned, but not

yet completed. Additional analyses to review all cable to cable hot shorts, which

I could affect the ability of the plant to reach safe shutdown, was a good initiative.

The completion schedule for resolution for identified issues was sgpropriate.

Resolution of the seven issues outlined in the October 22,1998, letter to BG&E i

were adequate. The licensee's Appendix R se f-assessment identified five non-  !

compliances. These licensee-identified and corrected violations were dispositioned i

as non-cited. (NCV 50-317,318/98-10-01 through 98-10-05)

F8.2 (Closed) Unresolved item 50-317.318/92-27-02: Control room ventilation

' Appendix R concerns. Inspection Report 50-317,318/92-27, section 7.3, 1

documented Appendix R fire concerns in which the licensee had not completed a

detailed evaluation to more accurately determine the adverse affects of losing both

trains of control room heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) following a

postulated fire. The inspector reviewed documents related to the corrective actions

of this deficiency.

l

The inspector found that the licensee had completed a detailed analysis of the I

effects of a fire in different areas of the plant that could potentially disable both

trains of the control room HVAC system. The inspector also found that the

licensee's calculations determined that without any cooling, the control room and

cable spreading room may heat-up to high enough temperatures, that continued

operation of the safe shutdown equipment in those rooms would be marginal. As a

result of these findings, the licensee prepared a modification package to install fan

coil units and staged flexible hoses to provide cooling air to the control room and

cable spreading room HVAC ducts in the event both HVAC trains are lost due to

fire. The inspector found that the engineering package (including 10 CFR 50.59

evaluations and calculations) for this modification was acceptable and that

installation of the modification had begun, with a p;anned completion date of the

end of 1998. The inspector also found that the engineering package contained

( sufficient documentation, acceptable installation instructions, and acceptable post-

l modification testing to ensure' operability of the modification. The inspector verified

-that various facets of the installation were in place during a walkdown of the

! I

'

1

- - - . - . -. .- . - - -

. >

. .

9

system. The inspector noted that the scope of this project was expanded to include I

chiller replacement, economizer cycle deletion, tornado related modifications, as

well as Appendix R modifications. l

The inspector concluded that the licensee had performed an acceptable evaluation

to determine the affects of losing both trains of control room HVAC following a

postulated fire. The inspector also concluded that the engineering package to install

this modification was acceptable. No violations of regulatory requirements were

identified during review of this issue. This item is closed.

1

F8.3 IC_losed) Notice of Violation (NOV) 50-317.318/96-05-01: Failure to provide l

adequate protection against consequential damage of a fire in the 45 ft switchgear

room (loss of ventilation to 27 ft switchgear room). An evaluation performed by a

contractor did not support long term operation of the equipment needed to

shutdown the reactor at temperatures of up to 150 F. The inspector reviewed

documents relating to corrective actions of this deficiency.

The inspector reviewed the corrective actions stated in the licensee's response

letter to the NOV, dated August 23,1996, and found the implementation

acceptable, in particular, the inspector reviewed engineering evaluation

ES199601186, revision O. The inspector found that the licensee had analyzed

equipment needed to shut the reactor down following a loss of ventilation in the

45 ft and 27 ft switchgear rooms and found that this equipment would be operable

under these conditions. The inspector found that the evaluation supports safe-

shutdown equipment operation in the 45 ft and 27 ft switchgear rooms. During a

walkdown of the switchgear rooms, the inspector verified that two fans for each of

the switchgear rooms was staged to provide adequate cooling in the event

ventilation is lost in those rooms.

The licensee also committed to perform an Appendix R compliance overview

evaluation. The review of the Appendix R self-assessment is discussed in section

F8.1 of this report.

Additionally, the licensee committed to initiate an Appendix R training program for

engineering personnel and engineering management. The focus of this training was

to raise the level of knowledge of Appendix R among site engineers. The inspector

verified the implementation of this program by witnessing a class given on July 9,

1998. The class provided the following learning objectives and was presented by

fire protection engineering personnel:

  • Understanding the PotentialImpact of Fire at Calvert Cliffs

j * Understanding the Development of Fire Protection Requirernents

l * Understanding the Basic Elements of Appendix R Compliance

  • Current NRC and Industry Fire Protection / Appendix R issues

i

l

l

,.; - .. . . . - . - _ - - . - - . - - - .- . . - - . -.-. -. .

10

The inspector attended the class and found it to be well planned and informative.

The class provided a good overview of Appendix R and fira protection issues and 1

provided acceptable training to engineering and management personnel.

,

- The inspector concluded that appropriate and acceptable corrective actions had

l been implemented by the licensee. The inspector also concluded that the licensee

l performed an acceptable evaluation of safe shutdown equipment operation in the

45 ft and 27 ft switchgear rooms.

l V. Manaaement Meetinas 1

X1 Exit Meeting Summary

The inspector presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at an )

l exit meeting on July 10,1998, and a supplemental exit meeting on December 3,1998.

l The licensee acknowledged the findings presented.

! The inspector asked the licensee whether any material reviewed during the inspection

should be considered as proprietary information. No proprietary information was identified.

l

The inspector indicated to the licensee that the slides presented to the NRC at the meeting

l held at NRC headquarters on November 18,1998, would be included as an enclosure to

l this report. These slides provided BG&E's response to questions provided to them in a

j letter from the NRC dated October 22,1998,

1

I

i

l

l

.

}

1:

-

.

.. _ _

_ ._... . . __. _ _ . _. . __

.,. ,

i

PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED

!

Calvert Cliffs (BG&E)

l

1

J. Biggans, Senior Assessor i

R. Buttner, Senicer Engineer DES

K. Cellars, Manager - Nuclear Energy Division

G. Cooper, Sr. Electrical Engineer (Bechtel)

C. Cruse, Vice President - Nuclear Energy Division

G. Detter, General Supervisor - Design Engineering

K. Eser, Regulatory Analyst

D. Findlay, Field Engineer - Fire Protection

A, Henni, Senior Engineer - MEU

P. Katz, Plant General Manager

C. Ludlow, Principal Engineer - MEU

E. McCann, Electrical Engineer

J. Osborne, Director - NRM (Acting)  !

M. Polak, Supervisor - EAU '

P. Robinson, Assessor - Nuclear Performance Assessment Department

C. Sinopoli, Appendix R and Fire Protection Engineer

C. Sly, Senior Engineer, NRM

R. Sydnor, Appendix R Project Manager

J. Wood, Fire Protection Design Engineer

NBC

l

l

F. Bower, Resident inspector

A. Dromerick, Project Manager for Calvert Cliffs - NRR

D. Lew,. Chief, Electrical Engineering Branch

L. Marsh, Chief, Plant n 7 stems Branch - NRR

P. Qualls, Fire Protection Engineer - NRR

W. Ruland, Chief, Electrical Engineering Branch (on temporary assignment)

J. Stewart, Senior Resident inspector

K. West, Chief. Plant Support Systems Section - NRR

- - - - - - - - - - - -

'

. .

INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED

IP 92904: Followup - Plant Support

ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

noened

50-317,318/98-10-01 NCV emergency lighting was inadequate in Unit 1 MSIV

room and the Unit 2 emergency shutdown panel

50-317,318/98-10-02 NCV air bottles stored in wrong location for a fire in

room 529

50-317,318/98-10-03 NCV Appendix R isolation hand switches were single fused

50-317,318/98 10-04 NCV hot shorts in MOV control cables could bypass MOV

limit switches, cause spurious operation, and potentially

damage the valve

50-317,318/98-10-05 NCV RCS/LPSI suction valves could open based on a

potential fire

Closed

50-317,318/97-08-08 URI potential issues identified during appendix R self

assessment to be not in compliance with regulatory

compliance

50-317,318/92-27-02 URI control room ventilation Appendix R concerns

50-317,318/96-05-01 VIO failure to provide adequate protection against

consequential damage of a fire in the 45 foot

switchgear room (loss of ventilation to 27 foot

switchgear room).

50-317,318/98-10-01 NCV emergency lighting was inadequate in Unit 1 MSIV

room and the Unit 2 emergency shutdown panel

50-317,318/98-10-02 NCV air bottles stored in wrong location for a fire in

room 529

50-317,318/98-10-03 NCV Appendix R isolation hand switches were single fused

50-317,318/98-10-04 NCV hot shorts in MOV control cables could bypass MOV

limit switches, cause spurious operation, and potentially

damage the valve

50-317,318/98-10-05 NCV RCS/LPSI suction valves could open based on a

potential fire

. . . . . . . .

.

..

.. .

_ ._ _. ___ _. _ _

, ,

l'

l

l'

1

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED

i AC Alternating Current

i AOP Abnormal Operating Procedure

DC Direct Current  ;

BG&E Baltimore Gas & Electric ,

CFR Code of Federal Regulations l

!

DRS' Division of Reactor Safety I

EDG Emergency Diesel Generator

EEB Electrical Engineering Branch

, GL Generic Letter l

'-

HVAC Heating, Ventilation anri Air Conditioning I

ICA Interactive Cable Analysis

IN - Information Notice

'

IR inspection Report

kV- Kilovolt

-LPSI Low Pressure Safety injection

MOV Motor Operated Valve

MHIF Multiple High Impedance Fault

MSIV Main Steam isolation Valve

l

-NCV Non-Cited Violation

NOV Notice of Violation

'

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NRR Nuclear Reactor Regulation

! PORV Pressure Operated Relief Valve

!' RCS Reactor Coolant System

RFO Refueling Outage

Vac Volts Alternating Current

Vdc Volts Direct Current

UFSAR Updated Final Safety Analysis Report

URI Unresolved item

l

l

t

['

. _. -

, ,

-

i

!

I

BGE Response to NRC

l Questions Concerning

Appendix R Self Assessment i

l

i

Introductions

I

-

BGE Attendees

l - Kevin Cellars, Manager-Nuclear Engineering Depanment

- Gary Detter, General Supervisor-Design Engineering

- Russ Sydnor, App. R/HVAC Project Manager 1

- Bruce Montgomery, Director-Nuclear Regulatory Matters

- John McVicker, Principal Engineer-Procurement

- Craig Sly, Senior Engineer; NRM

- Cliff Sinopoli, Senior Engineer-DES

i - Ed McCann, Engineer DES

l - Rich Buttner, Senior Engineer DES

- Mark Hogg, Reactor Operator

- Gary Cooper, Bechtel

2

!

. .

Introduction

BGE will provide a brief overview of our Appendix R

history.

BGE will provide an update on the status of the ections

associated with our Appendix R Self Assessment.

  • BGE will provide answers to the questions from NRC

October 22,1998 letter.

>

Introduction

  • The 1996 Appendix R Self Assessment was a

comprehensive review of the entire App. R program.

  • Resulting project plan included proposed resolutions and

schedule, which considered safety significance,

compliance, and resources.

. When the project plan actions are completed BGE's

App. R program will have been substantially enhanced.

-

  • We welcome this opportunity to answer the questions

raised in your October 22,1998 letter relative to the self

assessment.

4 ,

1

l

l

i

1

_ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ __ . _ _ _ _

.,_

_ -- - _ _

,

,

I

Calvert Cliffs Appendix R History

-

1981/1982 description of App. R program was submitted

to NRC.

l

-

September 1982, NRC issued third supplement to the Fire

'

Protection Safety Evaluation Report.

March 1984, NRC performed App. R inspection with no

l violations, deviations or other unacceptable conditions

identified.

-

1989 - 1991 self-identified Appendix R issues.

-

1992 EDSFI identified Switchgear Room HVAC potential

common mode failure.

  • 1993 Internal Task Force identified issues with App. R.

,

i

Calvert Cliffs Appendix R History

1996 NOV on switchgear room ventilation

1996 Appendix R self assessment

1997 Presentation of self assessment results

to Region 1

1997 Project Plan approved

'

l

,

_ _ .

- - -- - - -

c

- - - - - - - --

. .

l

l l

Status of App. R Self Assessment Issue

l Resolution

34 items identified.

21 items complete.

2 modifications scheduled for Unit 21999

re beting outage (Unit I completed).

6 items awaiting completion of reanalysis and

resulting procedure changes.

- ECD Late 1999

5 scheduled for completion in early 1999.

7

NRC Inspections in 1998

January - two week fire protection and App.

R Inspection with positive results.  ;

(Inspection Report 97-08)

June and July -Inspection of self

assessment issues-and project plan actions.

Exit meeting cited positive results. (Open

Inspection Report 98-10)

i

i

!

I

. e

1

l

i

Response to Questions

-

Response to the questions will be in the order

presented in the October 22,1998 letter.

- External Hot Shorts

- Reponability

- Diesel Generator Shutdown

- Raceway Enclosure

- Manual Actions

- Multiple High knpedance Faults

- High/ Low Pressure Interfaces

,

External Hot Shorts

SA-1

"

... please explain whether you agree or

disagree that Appendix R requires that you

evaluate all possible functional failure

states, including postulated cable to cable

faults and provide your basis. Also please

describe your assumptions for the analysis

currently underway and your projected

completion date."

i.

. , . .

.

.

.

.

_

..

. ,- --. . . - . - - .. - . - - - - , - - -

l

l

l

External Hot Shorts

l

' Original Appendix R Design Approach

l - Hot shorts between conductors within a cable

assumed.

- Hot shorts between multiple cables, considered

for hi/lo pressure interfaces, but not for other

components.

1

'

- Silicone-Asbestos jacketed cable insulation

used on low and medium voltage AC/DC

cables.

i,

l

i

External Hot Shorts

Voluntarily performing cable to cable hot

short analysis.

]

All cables that could affect safe shutdown

(including Associated Circuits) are

included.

. Considered All Spurious Actuations/ Signals I

as part of the analysis.

l >>

,

i

_ _ - ._ _ ._ . . _. _ _ _ _ _ . _._ - . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ - _ .

,

l

l

'

Reportability

SA-4

!

-

Basic issue: Reportability of Appendix R Issues

l -

Event ofinterest

l - RCS/LPSI Suction valves could open based on

l postulated fire in several locations. Explain

l your basis for not reporting this particular

,

Appendix R issue and other issues as

appropriate.

-

Also, state your plans to revise your reportability

procedures and criteria.

>>

Reportability

a

NUREG 1022 Rev 0 (1983) and Statement of .

Considerations for th'e LER rule (1983) did not proside

specific guidance on the definition of, "outside the design

basis of the plant"

- - BGE used the background information on other parts of

50.73 (a) (2) (ii), engineering judgment, and industry input

to develop a reportability threshold for outside the design

basis of the plant

_

- BGE's reportability threshold did not identify

Appendix R issues as reportable because they were not

considered a condition, "outside the design basis of the

plant."

i.

l

l

I

..

e

.- . _. - . - _- . _ .. . - . -- .- . .

!

l

l

Reportability

NUREG 1022, Rev 1 (January 1998)

provided new guidance on reportability of

l

Appendix R issues.

l -it provides guidance on what outside the design

! basis of the plant means

l - it provides several examples, some are specific

! to Appendix R issues

l

l$

'

1

l

Reportability

-

in the future, BGE will report Appendix R issues

where post fire safe shutdown capability is found

to be lacking

- BGE is monitoring issue reports for conditions that fall

into this reportability criteria

- BGE has completed training of many onsite groups that

identify and evaluate issues

- BGE has placed the new NUREG 1022 Rev 1 guidance

,

on our internal internet for reference

- Procedure changes will be complete by the end of the

year

l

is

l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _. ___ -_ . _ _ _

_, ___

%

1

Diesel Generator Shutdown

l SA 5

"

l ... please explain your basis for the actions

taken to shutdown the diesel generators

under certain post-fire scenarios and the

reason this is acceptable. Also, state your

final plans to resolve this issue."

17

l

Diesel Generator Shutdown

l

cooling. i

EDG shutdown until cooling water aligned

was described to NRC in 5/14/82 letter.

New EDG's reduced the need for EDG

shutdown from 11 rooms to 2 rooms.

- Specifically routed cable to enhance App. R

i

18

. _ .

- . _. . _ - . _ = . -. . -- -

, ,

Diesel Generator Shutdown

Off-site power is not isolated if available.

AC power is not isolated to eliminate

spurious actuations/ signals.

EDG shutdown only to protect diesel.

- Restarted once cooling water aligned

19

Diesel Generator Shutdown

EDG shutdown immediately from the

Control Room to prevent damage.

EDG restarted and tied onto bus if needed.

Engineering analysis demonstrates no AC

power is required for 90 minutes.

  • Procedure ensures Operators will restore

AC power within 60 minutes.

,

,

- .-. .- -- - . - _ _- . . .- _..

.

!

l

l

l

Raceway Enclosure

SA-6

l

l

"

l ... please explain your basis for installing a

l

1-hour rated enclosure on charging pump

No.11 powerfeed and how the installation

conforms to the requirements of App. R and

! to the guidance in GL 86-10, response 3.2.2.

Also explain how you determined the

enclosure meets the requirements."

21

Raceway Enclosure

  • The #12 Charging Pump is available for a  ;

fire in the #13 Charging Pump Room.

  1. 11 Charging Pump is not required for a fire

in the #13 Charging Pump Room.

"

!

,

4

.. . _ .- a - - -._...-. . .---- .- . . . .

l

i

I

I

powerW for #13 Reem i!4, Fn Area iI <

>

!

,owerW

.n ~ for,.,

I l

l ggy  ! h#d ggps

'

l

l 6 %,

f

y g;ei u

y c:ini

.;

-

l

O

_

"

Room!!5A

'% Fn Aree 5

-

.

., 7[

N l f. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . j '

b*

Tansfer

N,.owe,u . g-

- ._, ~

,owerW for

Fn mee 10

,m,, ,em .ii ~ ,.,

is sus

23

i

Manual Actions

SA-7

" . . . please explain your basis for using

wrenches and fuse pullers, as stated in your

AOP procedures, to bring the plant to a hot

shutdown condition. Also, explain how the l

'

use of tools meets the intent of your

licensing basis."

.

2

I

l

I 1

l

I

'

I

, .

.- - _ . . - -.

l l

l .

!,

Manual Actions

Pulling fuses and removing air from valves

j described to NRC in 9/30/81 submittal -

ICA Rev. O.

! -

1984 App. R Inspection Report describes

review of safe shutdown procedure.

l

BGE considers these operator actions as

L reviewed by the NRC and acceptable to

l achieve hot shutdown.

u

i

l

l

I

Manual Actions

-

These actions are part of normal operator

qualifications and are not considered repairs

because:

- Operators trained to pull fuses ,

- Required fuses clearly described in procedures

- Operators trained in breaking compression

fittings. l

l

l u

i

,

.

.

.__. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

,- ,

I

I

Manual Actions

  • Personnel safety concerns mitigated by

j training and use of fuse pullers.

  • Walkthrough training on the procedures

l accounts for time needed to perform manual

actions.

Our actions have been reviewed and

accepted by the NRC.

21

Multiple High Impedance Faults

SA-16

"

... please explain your basis for not

performing MHIF evaluations on all AC

and DC Appendix R safe shutdown circuits

using guidance provided in GL 86-10."

.

l se 1

l

__

. .

Multiple High Impedance Faults

a BGE bounding analysis does consider all Shutdown

circuits.

.

AC MHIF analysis considered technically correct

by Self Assessment Team.

- Calvert Cliffs relas on fuses, not breakers for DC

and vital AC, so GL 86-10 approach not directly

applicable and will not work.

Calven Cliff; arealysis methodology is conservative

and an improvement to GL 86-10 approach.

n

High/ Low Pressure Interface

sA-33

"

... please explain your basis for documenting the

exclusion of PORV's, reactor head vents, and

MOV-651 as high/ low pressure interface valves.

Also, please explain procedural changes made to

stop spurious actions from causing these valves to

open. Additionally, please explain how you

derv astrated the plant can be safely shutdown

with a RCS release and what is your basis."

'

=

_ _ _ _ _

r ,

_ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _. ._._ _._. _ _ _ ._ _.. _ _ _. - _ . . _ _ _ . _

.

!

l

High/ Low Pressure Interfaces

!

' Project plan wording was confusing.

j PORV's, Reactor Head Vents, and MOV-

l 651 are considered Hi/Lo pressure

i interfaces.

l

  • Manual actions to mitigate consequences of

Hi/Lo interfaces are placed at the beginning

of procedures.

l

  • RCS release has been analyzed.

u

!

!

l

l

Conclusion

l

l Calvert Cliffs maintains an active approach to

the Appendix R program.

Approaches taken represent not only licensing

basis but always consider safety significance.

( We believe that we have addressed each of the

questions raised in the October 22,1998 letter.

= I

l

.

I

i

i

l

. , _.

J

SELF ASSESSMENT 11/18/98 ~I

SCOPE TASK SUMMARY ,

DESIGN /

TASK ASSIGNED ANALYSIS RESP.

PRIORITY NUMBER TASK TITLE DISCIPLINE 1 COMPLETE PERSON

WORK COMPL'T STATUS COMMENTS

Analysis approx. 98% complete. Issue ,

(NRC-1)

~

ECD- new ICA in first quarter 1999. Revise

GRP-1 # SA - 1 External Hot Shorts .

Electrical WORKING NO E.McCann 10/30/99 AOP-09 procedures by 10/30,99_

GRP-I SA-2 Emergency Ughts .

-

YES YES C. Sinopou COMPLETE Cornplete, Notebook Available .

i

GRP-I SA-3 Lifted Leads on EDG Circuits .

Electrical YES YES R. Sydnor COMPLETE Complete, Notebook Available  !

t

(NRC-2) ECD- Pending completion of follow-up

GRP-l # SA - 4 N/A NO LM  ;

(NRC-3)

GRP-I # SA - 5 Self induced Station Blackout YES YES h COMPLETE

(NRC-4)

GRP-I # SA - 6 Raceway Fire Barrier WC YES N/A J. Wood COMPLETE

(NRC-5)

GRP-I # SA - 7 Manual Actions Tools YES N/A C. Sinopou COMPLETE Complete. Notebook Available

ECD - 99 Unit 1 is complete. Unit 2 will complete

ES199602079 RFO + 60 during 1999 RFO. Per Ed Emery x-

GRP-2 SA-8 Dual Fusing. InfoNotice 85-09 l Electrical I YES WORKING E.McCann Days

ECD - 99

2256

ES199602091 RFO + 60 Unit 1 is compt. Unit 2 ECD 99 RFO.

GRP-2 SA-9 MOVs, InfoNotice 92-18 Electrical - IYES WORKING E.McCann Days Non outage by 11/98. Ed Emery x-2256

ECD- SEE SA-01 COMMENTS FOR

GRP-2 SA - 10 Spurious Operation l Electrical l WORKING NO E. McCann 10/30/99 STATUS AOP-09 procedure revisions.

! I Large Fire Areas .

GRP-2

GRP-2

SA - 11 Fire Areas - 10 and 11

SA - 12 : Fire Area - Auxiliary Building Roof

,E YES

YES

N/A

N/A

E.McCann

J. Wood

E.McCann

J. Wood

C. Sinopoli

COMPLETE

COMPLETE Complete. Notebook Available

ECD-

Prehm Analysis by SE does not indicate

a challenge to SS. AOP-09 procedure

GRP-2 SA - 13 Instrument Air Functio ality___ Electncal NO NO C. Faller 10/30/99 h ed.____.___ ..

Air Bottfe, CV-517 YES C.5:no-A li COMPLETE Complete, Notebook Available

-

GRP-2, SA - 14 N/A

NRC MEETING 11/1&S8 Page 1

_ _ _ _ _ _ . _

3

'

SELF ASSESSMENT 11/18/98

SCOPE TASK SUMMARY i

DESIGN / 7

TASK ASSIGNED ANALYSIS RESP.  !

PRIORITY NUMBER TASK TITLE DISCIPLINE COMPLETE WORK COMPL'T PERSON STATUS COMMENTS

GRP-2 SA-15 Instrument Sensing Lines Electrical YES YES E.McCann COMPLETE Complete. Notebook Available

(NRC-6) .

E.McCann ECD- AC complete. DC in review - E.

GRP-2 # SA - 16 Multiple High impedance Faults Electrical YES NO R. Buttner M McCann

G. Wolf

A. Henni ECD- Modification to CR HVAC in progress. t

'

GRP-2 SA - 17 YES NO R. Sydnor 10/30/99 AOP-09 procedure; changes required.

M. Hogg

GRP-2 SA-18 YES YES h COMPLETE

GRP-2 SA-19 Embedded Conduits YES N/A J. Wood COMPLETE j

GRP-2 SA-20 Fire Suppression Effects YES N/A J. Wood COMPLETE Cornplete, Notebook Available

GRP-3 SA - 21 Process Monitoring ________ Electrical- YES YES E.McCann COMPLETE Closed during Self Assessment

Cc. Tile references and develop

GRP-3 SA - 22 Fire Barrier Evaluations YES YES J. Wood Complete notebook.

ECD- Compile References and develop

GPP-3 SA-23 YES N/A h SM *

Compile References and develop

GRP-3 SA - 24 YES N/A hh Notebook.

Have information on Handswitches

available needs to be inserte d i sto

GRP-3 SA - 25 Fire Damper Operability YES YES J. Wood Complete FFSM during next revision.

E.McCann Note book with analysis is in cabinet.

GRP-3 SA - 26 Communications Electrical ' YES YES G. Kniertern Complete G. Knieriem is contact

Work is complete, new format has been

GRP-3 SA-27 ICA Format Electrical ' l YES YES E.McCann COMPLETE developed

Complete - ICA Attemate Safe j

GRP-3 SA - 28 Report on Attemate Shutdown Electrical l YES YES E.McCann COMPLETE Shutdown Analysis has been revised.

NRC MEETING 11/18/98 Page 2

J

- SELF ASSESSMENT 11/18/93 2

SCOPE TASK SUMMARY s

DESIGN /

TASK ASSIGNED ANALYSIS RESP.

PRIORITY NUMBER TASK TITLE DISCIPLINE COMPLETE WORK COMPL'T PERSON STATUS COMMENTS

Approximately 98% complete. See SA-

-

ECD- 01 above. Indudedin newICA

GRP-3 SA - 29 Comprehensive Equipment List Electrical YES WORKING E.Me,Cann 10/30f99 Database.

Issue Reviewed, No Further Action

GRP-3 SA - 30 Electrical Distnbutkin Systems Electrical YES YES E.McCann COMPLETE Required

E.McCann ECD- Need Final Resolution by EEU Ken

GRP-3 SA - 31 Bmaker/ Fuse Coordination Electrical WORKING NO R. Buttner Spring 1999 Sebra

GRP-3 SA - 32 Current Transformer Analysis Elodrical YES YES E.McCann Complete Complete, Notebook being prepared.

(NRC-7) --

J. Wood ECD- Fire Analy-is Reovired for PORV's

GRP-3 4 SA - 33 High/ Low Pressure Interface Electrical YES NO E.McCann Spring 1999 Enhancement, Work in progress

Acceptable. Will revise ES-20,31 & 44

ECD- as applicable upon completeien of SA-

GRP-3 SA - 34 Long Term Compliance Procedures Electrical YES NO E.McCann 10/30/99 01.

1

  1. Those tasks identified in NRC letter dated October 22,1998 request for additional information

and justification in preperation for November 18,1998 Significant Meeting 98-82.

.

NRC MEETING 11/18/9e Page 3

_ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . - - - _ _-_-_- _ . - _ _ . .