ML20203H496
| ML20203H496 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 02/23/1998 |
| From: | Richards S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Maynard O WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203H499 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-97-201, NUDOCS 9803030245 | |
| Download: ML20203H496 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000482/1997201
Text
..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ - - _ - - -
e
pm troug
p
- *
k
UNITED STATES
j
j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGToH, D.c. 20666-0001
p% .....[
February 23, 1998
Mr. Otto L Maynard, President
and Chief Executive Officer
Wolf Creek Nuclecr Operating Corporation
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 66839
SUBJECT:
WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION DESIGN INSPECTION (NRC
INSPECTION REPORT NO 50-482/97-201)
Dear Mr. Maynard:
From November 3,1997, through January 9,1998, the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Events Assessments, Generic
Communications and Special Inspection Branch, performed a des!gn inspection of the Wolf
Creek Generating Station. The inspection covered the residual heat removal (RHR) and
component cooling water (CCW) systems and their support-interface systems. The purpose of
l
the inspection was to evaluate the capability of these systems to perform the safety functions
l
required by their design bases, the adherence of the systems to their design and licensing bases,
and the consistency of the as-built configuration and system operations with the updated safety
analysis report (USAR). The results of this inspection are presented in the enciosed report.
The inspection team determined that the selected systems were capable of performing their
intended safety functions and that design and licensing bases were adequately adhered to,
except as noted below. Where appropriate, your staff took corrective actions to ensure system
operability.
I
The team identified the following weaknesses in 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations and design changes:
(1) The design change and safety evaluation for the replacement of Class 1E batteries with
AT&T round cell batteries did not address the effect on Technical Specifications (TS). Currently,
TS Sections 4.8.2.1.e and f regaroing battery capacity replacement criteria and battery
degradation criteria appear to be nonconservative because the batteries were sized without
aging factors and the battery performance characteristic was changed. 'he battery design
capacity margin was less than that stated in the staff's safety evaluation report (NUREG-0881;
and the USAR. The NRR staff will review the design change to determine the adequacy of the
,
existing TS. (2) The design change and safety evaluation for lowering the CCW temperature did
not address the effects of low temperature on the spent fuel pool reactivity and on diesel
generator loarling. (3) A reactor coolant system (RCS) draindown procedure for installing the
N
nitrogen bottles used during plant refueling outages did not have a safety evaluation to address
cM$ seismic restraint requirements to preclude potential missiles.
Non.
l
h.o
,
The team identified many calculations with errors or inappropriate or nonconservative
(
l
o
assumptions. In some cases analysis did not exist to support the design bases. For example:
l
the refueling water storage tank instrument loop uncertainty calculations did not consider density
ingp
variations due to temperature and boron concentrations which affected the alarm setpoints, the
oE
swapover setpoints, and the level indications; the direct current (de) voltage drop calculation did
@<
not identify the worst-case minimum battery voltage to ensure adequate voltage at equipment
Qg
terminals; nonconservative downstream pressures were assumed for CCW motor-operated
Ne
tr p C7 C C
"""il
F.or
ll ll l.il.lill 11 I.I I.ll lYTJ k LW Ca tG 6 L uk $$
h
-W
..
=
-
__
_ __ _ _ _ _ _
e
0
Mr. Otto L M:ynard
-2-
FeDrucry 23, 1998
-
valves in valvo e,osure calculations resulting in incorrect design differential pressures for valves;
the calculation to estimate the maximum control circuit wire lengths for motor control center
.
startti control circuits did not model the auxiliary loads correctly; and there were no analyses to
l
demonstrate that 120 Vac feeders and control circuits were protected adequately during a fault,
and that 120 Vac safety related loads have adequate voltages.
There were deficiencies in surveillance testing of batteries and load growth control for the de
l
system, and a number of discrepancies in the USAR, system descriptions, and other plant
documents.
A number of issues identified by the team indicated a need to emphasize design and
configuration-control in maintaining the design and licensing bases. Your staff had established a
design basis / licensing basis review program to address these types of concems, but this new
program had not yet produced widespread or consistent results at the time of the inspection.
As with all NRC inspections, we expect that your staff will evaluate the applicability of the results
and specific findings of this inspection to other systems and components throughout the plant. In
addition, please evaluate the inspection findings, both specific and programmatic, against your
response to NRC's October 9,1996, request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)
regarding the adequacy and availability of design bases information.
In accordance with Section 2.790(a) of Title 10 of the Code of Federa/ Regulations, a copy of this
letter and the enclosure will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, where they will be
made available to the public, unless you notify this office by telephone within 10 days of the date
of this letter and submit a written application to withhold the information contained therein. Such
application must be consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1). Any enforcement
action resulting from this inspection will be handled by NRC Region IV via separate
(
correspondence.
I
Should you have any questions conceming the enclosed inspection report, please contact the
project manager, Ms. Kristine M. Thomas, at (301) 415-1362, or the inspection team leader,
Mr. Roy K. Mathew, at (201) 415-2965.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Stuart A. Richards, Chief
Events Assessment, Generic Communications,
and Spt,cial Inspection Branch
Division of Reactor Program Management
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No.: 50-482
Enclosure: Inspection Report 50-482/97-201
cc: see next page
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ WOLF.RPT *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
To r::ctive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with
enclosures "N" = No copy
OFFICE
PECB
PECB
POV-2:DRPW
PECB:DRPM
d
l
NAME
R KMathew*
DPNorkin'
WBateman*
SARchards
5pk
DATE
2/2%8
2/7%8
2/2 % 8
2/d/98
OFFICIAL RECORD COFv
__ _____ _______-_____
_
.
v
.
DISTRIBUTION FOR WOLF CREEK INSPECTION REPORT:
l
Dated: February 23, 1998
g&$b}
PUBLIC
PECB R/F
J. Roe, NRR
inspection Team
l
K. Thomas, NRR
R. Mathew, NRR
W. Bateman, NRR
E Peyton, NRR
D. Norkin, NRR
S. Richards, NRR
E. Adensam, NRR
B. Sheron, NRR
,
C.E. Rossi, NRR
J.F. Ringwald, SRI
H. Miller, RI
L.Reyes,Ril
A. Beach, Rlll
E. Merschoff, RIV
C. Hehl, RI
J. Wiggins, RI
J. Johnson, Rll
J. Jaudon, Ril
J. Caldwell, Rlli
G. Grant, Rip
T. Gwynn, r<lV
A. Howell, RIV
T. Stetka, RIV
W. Johnson, RIV
L. Marsh, NRR
M. Cunningham, RES
J. Rosenthal, AEOD
ACRS(3)
OGC (3)
11SDistribution
.
.
_.
-- - _.
.
.--_
.
_
.
.
-_
.
.
s
6
Mr. Otto L. Maynard
Wolf Creek Generating Station
cc:
4
Jay di! berg, Esq.
Chief Operatira Officer
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
2300 N Street, NW
P. O. Box 411
Washington, D.C. 20037
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Regional Administrator, Region IV
Supervisor Licensing
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000
P.O. Box 411
Arlington, Texas 76011
Buriington, Kansas 66839
Senior Resident inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
U.S. NJclear Regulatory Commission
Resident inspectors Office
P. O. Box 311
8201 NRC Road
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Steedman, Missouri 65077 1032
Chief Engineer
Utilities Division
Kansas Corporation Commission
1500 SW Arrowhead Road
Topeka, Kansas 66604 4".27
Office of the Govemor
State of Kansas
Topeka, Kansas 66612
Attorney General
Judicia! Center
,
i
301 S.W.10th
2nd Floor
Topeka, Kansas 66612
County Clerk
Coffey County Courthouse
Burlingtan, Kansas 66839
Vick L. Cooper, Chief
Radiation Control Program
Kansas Department of Health
and Environment
Bureau of Air and Radiation
Forbes Field Building 283
Topeka, Kansas 66620
. . .