ML20203C374
| ML20203C374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 02/17/1998 |
| From: | Warren C WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| WO-98-0016, WO-98-16, NUDOCS 9802250168 | |
| Download: ML20203C374 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ a WQLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION Clay C. Warren Chief Operating OfPer February 17. 1998 WO 98-0016 e U. S. Nuclear Pequlatory Commission AYTN: Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-137 Washington, D. C. 20555 3 References 1) Letter WO 97-0002, dated June 24, 1997, from C. C. Warren, WCNOC, to USNRC 2) Letter WM 97-0141, dated November 26, 1997, from O. L. Maynard, WCNOC, to USNRC
Subject:
Docket No 50-482: Supplemental Information Associated to Changes to the Operating Quality Assurance Program, Wolf Creek Generating Station Gentlemen Reference 1 transmitted a request for approval of changes to the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) Operating Quality Assurance 'rogram. Reference 2 submitted additional information to support review of Reference 1. The attachments to this letter transmit supplemental information to both references. provides a brief description of the changes being made. provides actual Updated Safety Analysis Report sections reflecting the described changes. This information is based on a telephone discussion held January 28, 1998, between Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCNOC) personnel, the NRC reviewer and the NRC Project Manager for WCGS. If you deve any questions regarding this response, please contact me at (316) 364-8831, extension 4483, or Mr. W. B. Norton at extension 4553. Very truly yours, I bM j C y C. Warren CCW/jad Attachments cc: W. D. Johnson (NRC), w/a h' E. W. Merschoff (NRC), w/a OY J. F. Ringwald (NRC), w/a K. M. Thomas (NRC), w/a 9802250168 980217 f'lf ll)'lll lll'j lll-PDR ADOCK 05000482 3 P PDR PO. Box 411 ! Burt:ngton, KS 66839 i Phone: (316) 364 8831 An Equa Opportunity Ernpioyer M F HCVET
l Attachment I to WO 98-0016 Pa g,e 1 o f, 1 Supplemental Information R orning Operating Quality Assurance Program Changes Pur: nt to 10 CFR 50.54 (a) (3) As a result of a telephone conversation held Janua: 28, 1998, between Wolf an NRC reviewer, and Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCNOC) pe r s or.: the NRC Project Manager for Wolf Creek GeneratinJ Station (WCGS), the following three issues were identified. These issues require resolution in order to facilitate the review and approval of the Operating Quality Assurance Program. The issues and a resolution are summarized below. The revised sections of the Updated Sa fety Analysis Report (USAR) have been included in. Reviewer Comment: The reviewer suggested WCNOC clectly identify the organization responsible for the activity of trending hardware and non-hardware failures. The reviewer also requested that WCNOC discuss the types of hardware trending in addition to maintenance rule trending. Wolf Creek Response: Section 17.2.15.5 of the USAR has been revised to indicate the organization responsible for trending hardware non-conformances. The revised version of this section is attached and will be implemented in conjunction with the changes requested in the original submittal. Responsibility for non-hardware non-conformances is discussed in 17.2.16.5 and was not revised as part of the submitted change. However, due to a recent reorganization, the group who is currently identified in the USAR as being responsible, now reports to the Manager Licensing and Corrective Action. This change has been reviewed in accordance with 10 CFR 50. 54 (a ) (3), 10 CFR 50.59 and will be submitted with the annual USAR update. Reviewer Comment: The reviewer suggested WCNOC discuss in USAR Chapter 17 what criteria would be used to transform a hardware non-conformance into a Performance Improvement Request (PIR), and explain the process more clearly. Wolf creek Response: Section 17.2.15.5 has been revised to address this comment. The revised version of this section is attached and will be implemented in conjunction with the changes requested in the original submittal. Reviewer Comment: The reviewer suggested that WCNOC more nicarly explain the Supplier Material Quality close-out-involvement in conditional re. eases. Wlf Creek Response: St mion 17.2.15.2, Non-conformance Controls, has been revised to stipulate Supplier Material Quality involvement in the close-out of conditional releases. This revised section has been attached and will be implemented in conjunction with the changes requested in the original submittal.
i i to WO 98-0016 Pag,e 1 o( 3 Revised Updated Safety Analysis Report Sections 17.2.15 NONCOND)RMING MATERI AL, PARTd, OR COMPONENTS 17.2.15.1 Scope Nonconformances are any deficiency in characteristics, documentation, or procedure which renders the quality of an itam unacceptable or indeterminate. Nonconformances, therefore, include material deficiencies, malfunctioning or inoperative structures, systems and components, and departures from specified procedural requirements which impact the quality of an item. Nonconforming _ activities which have not resulted in hardware nonconformances (i.e., programmatic or procedural deficiencies which do not impact the quality of an item), are corrected in accordance with Chapter 17.2.16, Corrective Action. 17.2.15.2 Nonconformance Controls O etet4e9-A ettt Le-{teret+e9-Oua1it y Noncon f ormances 4 den 4-&f4ed-un+kr i H t 9 Pregfem-are identified, documented, controlled, dispositioned and corrected in accordance with approved procedures. These measures provide for the notification of affected parties and controls to prevent the inadvertent use of nonconforming iters. Nonconformances are controlled by repart documentation, tagging, ma r ki rig, logging, or physical segregatic Nonconformances are documented on records which identify the nonconforming condition, record the disposition, and register the signature of an appropriate epproval authority. Nonconformances are reworkad, rejected, repaired, or accepted. Repaired and reworxed items are reinspected / tested in accordance with applicable procedures to ensure that critical attributes possibly affected by the nonconforming condition remain acceptable. These procedures are based on original inspe: tion and test requirements or approved alternatives. Reinspection results and operational data, gathered subsequent to repair or rework, are documented or referenced on nonconformance, test or inspection documentation. The design / configuration change procesa is used in the Nonconformance Program to carry out dispositions of "use-as-is" or " repair." This process ensures that all aspects of plant operation are considered in light o' the fact that the dispositioned item is now not exactly per oriainal design. These considerations include revision of applicable drawings, possible revisions to operation, test, mainter.ance and inspection procedures! training of affected personnel, changes to spare parts inventory; unreviewed safety questions; and review of licensing documents, Measures have been established to control the conditional release of mmeettf-orcetteeo-nonconforming items from the warehouse, for which correction l is pending and a technical evaluation indicates that inr > 1ation and/or testing will not adversely affect nor preclude identification and correction of the nonconformance. A conditioaal release to proceed with Jnstallation and/or *FEh-testing of a system or subsystem with outstanding nonconformaaces considers the nature of the nonconformance, its effect on lastallation and/or testing and the need for supplemental tests or inspections after correction of the nonconformance. Conditional release evaluations are documented and the conditional release is closed by Jupplier/ Material Quality when the nonconforming condition is resolved. GM eby-relat M ax M pc^.21 aeope .;c d a nd a;pe+wed-by ' h e Op e ra t og ",g e:.t ' : eendkt4ettM-relca c c c we re.. Federennee4*mwemeet-end Acccc cmt "ideneo-p r i o r te imp 1 ~ rth.Mettr Nonconforming items required for Technical Specification Operability are only released for use through the design / conf,guration change process and, thus, cannot be conditionally released for operations.
~ ~... - . -to WO 98-0016 ,Page 4 of 3- + 17.2.-15.3 Disposition Procedures prescribe the individuals or groups assigned the . responsibility and authority to approve the disposition-of nonconformances. Nonconformance disposition ~ categories aret 1. " Reject" - the process by which a nonconforming item is rejected for use and either scrapped, returned to vendor, or downgraded to allow for use in a Non-O System. 2. " Rework" - the process by which a nonconforming item is 't made to conform to a prior specified requirement by completion, remachining, reassembling or other corrective means. 3. " Repair" - the process of restoring a nonconforming l characteristic to a condition such that the capability of an item to function reliably and safely is unimpaired, even though that item still may not conform to the original requitement. 4. "Use-as-is" - A disposition which may be imposed for (i.e., a nonconformance when it can be estab-Accept) lished that the discrepancy will result in no adverse conditions and that the item under consideration will continue to meet all engineering functional requirements 9 including performance, mainteinability, fit and safety. " Repair" and "Use-as-is" dispositions are approved i y the responsible design authority as prescribed in procedures. This authority is an organization which has demonstrated competence in the specific area..has an adequate understanding of the requirements and has access tu pertinent background information. Frier to ie Hementation, dispecit cn cre independently rc;ic..cd-by i Pet 4memtee-4*pr+ve ment cnd A cc c:cnt-r 4 a 5 M-4 + a.
o.to WO 98-0016 e Pago 3 of 3 l'.2.15.5 Pr+eure w.nt cont 01o Nnt-end-cther ^pc:cthg " gent cegefdeatic. precederec prcccribe . cre.i _a kpee4 * :,_ _. .r.rw. m,_....e,.,. y _ L,. _ a .a ^ _.. : eneceu. _- _ .c m .L-m-..... ~..r. .2 14g..n.e s a t... s .n a,, r - _.. e.. w.. -. -.......,. .u : L g.~ .~... _m p m ,.,mw-.m., x-.._..a.-,._~-..r,.. .v.. .~.-...g _..L_: .,..m._.._or.w,.,....__,..__ . L.. a.. a .. ~., _. w , ~.. .c_ .~.pp ..,,1..r
- s. L...
. A.:.-.2s.t~~.. A-A Q g &.. n... s.t.,- g9y. s vn-w-. m .m. s Actions tcAen-kt-reepcnce to thecc ncnconfermanccc require documrntatica w end-o. .z.s... _x.~._.. Ope.. 1,-.s.. gent... .,. s. u.
- a. u.. u.. a...... ~
a .u ..s. ..r....t._.,.mt-qu., s.... -.:.e.1 ~..z _.., _x. .. n m.a.... 1 -. ,. u.. w. n.,_..a..,-.. r.a... - r .w. m. ervan+ eat 4en-feepen ci bl e for correcti+,g the probl-- cpprc c; the --...~.."ed-dkp--..'....^'....~..'..--._.'._".2.w-",.- ..w ^m,".'. y- .y . y n......a. m.u.. n r.. ,...r._...._.A A,..a. n. m...z _achprw. art.. .a.. 9 2 1. -~.... . w._ .w . u_. ..r .-.. a 1.. w h~ h e _. __ _-_ _....tsf-f-ke--reep_-. _.L.,_ r__ ....,. L..,. .w v._..., r., m,. - _ : > 1 _ r. - - _..'~ -- -..... a s. - _ -. ..Ja.-as _ : s :. _ .n. -r- --r-----~. -rr--- s L.. n .1.. A._ r. M. a L. .I...1..~.A-..t,-....-n..g...~ ..s -.,.-. c _, _ _._,,.A,
- a. L..,w
.r- , _ ry,._. A. L>y-+h' e deak m.,/ _.... t.! q. u. _ 6,- w...- .L .~ w m. t .. r recpcncMe -dee+9n aut4terher 17.2.15.46 Reportable Nonconformances(This section revised and moved to 17.2.4.5.5) Nonconformances are evaluated for reportability to the NRC under 10 CFR 21. All nonconformances identified as reportable are reviewed by the PSRC and NSRC. 17.2.15.54 Trend Analysis kneerder+anee-deeument-etien is ena' y cd by erformance Imprcycment cr4 n Asseeem-.t-personnci for idet;tificati' cf--pcttnt ial uncat icf actc:y r-r _ _... - ..--e .__r_ eu __.3.- Pu_ _ _ _ _,o +..,3 ,.... ___A ,..a .._A_. m - - +-2 -- - ~ ~- -.. a u. ~- _4..--.a... .e.s g.: . _...a., a. __- w,,:... ...rmw. .w .w,~. ... ~ Pee 9 tam-+cende a c hoodled i aeeefeaf.cc ith Section l',2.16. Hardware nonconformances are reviewed by Engineering to identify potential unsatisfactory trends (e-nples may include repetitive, significant, or functional failures). Onsatisfactory trends are documented and evaluated using the Performance Improvement Request (PIR) in accordance with Section 17.2.16. hrd cre f;ilurcc arc revicacd.;ithin R,.-m.r. a, i -- - n .,.f.,. ,m,,m T r..- - 6-n-m..-_6 fnTn1 L.. 6 t. - - - --- -- - - - - -i- ,L 6 L< th.m r -. -,-v -~r -r -. - v --This program determines and evaluates the causes of the unsatisfactory trends when they are classified as a significant PIR hard. arc ma l f un ct ion;/ f ail u rce. This includes aA review and evaluation by Engineering of previous experiences (trending) for the equipment or component 10 rde-to determine whether the item is functionally reliable. ,w..u.- n,, w '.. ' " '. '.. ' ', " " "s u- .m, "o w. -- ' "." ". ' " " ' r-vu ~-~ .s .~ w 3 . -i eeptu.cc pCsti."-.t infor.0 tic-f '.' r c c l e c t+M. -t*qe4FL for inductry ---..+a-- .1, s, -s
- m. a.t
- y.. s.
v nn. 'n e-
u r-'---'.~L..w-
,'~"rsL- ~. r2 1..:r--v'," t. u L..: & L. w,. ..-,-:..w..wwA sa, e. v w, t,. w.mw vm
- L,6 f h.Y.
.v r .w.. su u wa .g ..y %ww s~. A-s- !.g .~..A ,..*L..w__ w ...,.J g. ! .u s..-. e., L.., m..A....,... m L.... m. A, ~ --wo 6 _su. m.~ m. m, needed corfective Tc0curec bOccd cr. ti-c identified rect caucc and
- g. a. a w o m u..:w m.,
,a w. w.- uw ..+:ww*.: _a w-u u my u.-..- .1 v.r s u.w ._v.ny...e6 5 .wu w. .w. .y wi %e .-mmv.au v y.1 s - - - - .6%. Y... w.w n1, asw us www. 6 L u .. L ..n... !1 A s ,1..
- a. m. w..-
.r,,. w. u yvsv .w au. m.wwu 1vu u.. %...., _ _, e n n, n e swwu .v . _ a.w w u w.,.1,_. .r. .M. C .. v w w. o am, .ww a_. _. p o u.r c. .yi O Om[C n c "it hefockIken0. l _}}