ML20211E737

Insp Rept 50-482/87-05 on 870202-06.Violations Noted:Failure to Take Action Specified by Tech Spec Action Statement & Failure to Perform safety-related Activities in Accordance W/Established Procedures

ML20211E737
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	02/12/1987
From:	Bruce Bartlett, Cummins J, Hunter D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20211E701	List: ML20211E696 ML20211E737
References
50-482-87-05, 50-482-87-5, NUDOCS 8702240397
Download: ML20211E737 (5)

See also: IR 05000482/1987005

Text

-

O O #m

APPENDIX

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-482/87-05 License: NPF-42

Docket: 50-482

Licensee: Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation

Post Office Box 411

Burlington, Kansas 66839

Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)

Inspection At: Wolf Creek Site, Coffey County, Burlington, Kansas

Inspection Conducted: February 2-6, 1987

Inspectors: M oJ //.2/ 6 7

s . E. Cunnins, Senior Resident Inspector, Date

Operations

Gt

B. L~.

whl .

Bartlet Q Resident Reactor Inspector,

24tho

Date

Operations

Approved: I t I7

D. F, Hunter, Chief, Reactor Project Date

l

Reactor Projects Branch

i

l

Inspection Sunnary

Inspection Conducted February 2-6, 1987 (Report 50-482/87-05)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the reactor coolant system

flow rate surveillance.

Results: Two potential violations were identified (failure to take the action

i specified by a Technical Specification Action Statement and failure to perform

, safety-related activities in accordance with established procedures,

l paragraph 2).

l

! B702240397 870213

l PDR ADOCK 05000482

O PDR

'

_ _ _ _ _ _

k O P

-2-

DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted

Principal Licensee Personnel

F. T. Rhodes, Vice President, Nuclear Operations

• R. M. Grant, Vice President, Quality

• J. A. Bailey, Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services

• G. D. Boyer, Plant Manager

• M. G. Williams, Superintendent of Regulatory , Quality, and

Administrative Services

• C. M. Estes, Superintendent of Operations

M. D. Rich, Superintendent of Maintenance

• 0. L. Maynard, Licensing Manager

• K. Peterson, Licensing Supervisor

• G. J. Pendergrass, Licensing Engineer

R. Flannigan, Supervisor of Compliance Engineering

R. Wollum, Supervisor of Instrumental and Control (I&C)

W. B. Norton, Supervisor of Reactor Engineering

• P. D. Adams, Reactor Engineer

D. Gerrelts, Senior Engineer Specialist

• A. A. Freitag, Nuclear Plant Engineering Manager

• W. J. Rudolph, Quality Assurance Manager

• C. J. Hoch, QA Technician

The NRC inspectors also contacted other members of the licensee's staff

during the inspection period to discuss identified issues.

• Denotes those personnel in attendance at the exit meeting held on

February 9,1987.

2. RCS Flow Rate

On February 4,1987, in discussions with licensee personnel, the NRC

inspectors became aware that on January 14, 1987, Surveillance Procedure

STS RE-011, Revision 1, "RCS Total Flow Rate Measurement," was performed.

The licensee personnel stated that the result of the surveillance was that

the calculated RCS total flow rate was 389,200 gpm, which was below the

Technical Specification (TS) limit of at least 393,500 gpm. When questioned

as to why the action statement to TS 3.2.3 was not entered, the licensee

personnal stated:

. The Surveillance was performed at 76 percent and the calculations

would be more accurate at higher power levels;

. the RCS total flow rate for Cycle 1 was above the TS limit and no

modifications had been performed during the first refueling outage

which would change the flow rate;

-

e s

-3-

. reactor coolant pump (RCP) current and voltage were evaluated and

found to be normal;

. all four loop flow meters were in close agreement with each other

which indicated a lack of flow blockage; and

. the loose parts monitor appeared normal.

The licensee personnel also stated that subsequently, on January 15, 1987,

they had determined that the core exit therinocouples appeared to be

indicating properly, and that on January 26, 1987, the feedwater flow

instruments were found to be set incorrectly. During the investigation of

the low RCS flow rate problem, licensee personnel determined that the flow

venturi differential pressures that had been used for the calibration of

the main feedwater flow instruments were incorrect and that the

calibration procedure for these instruments did not include an allowance

for a span shift error as recommended by the instrument vendor. The

estimated error that could have been caused by these two factors was

approximately 1.8 percent of feedwater flow. The licensee revised

Procedure STN IC-417E, Revision 1, " Calibration of Steam and Feedwater

Flow Transmitters," to correct the main feedwater flow venturi pressures

and to include the span shift in the calibration. After calibration of the

feedwater flow transmitters using the corrected STN IC-417E, the total

error prior to the correction appeared to have been approximately 1

percent.

Technical Specification 3.2.3 requires that, "The combination of indicated

reactor coolant system (RCS) total ficw rate and R shall be maintained

within the region of allowable operation shown on Figure 3.2-3." Figure

3.2-g requires that RCS total flow rate be greater than or equal to 39.35

X 10 gallons per minute. TS surveillance requirement 4.2.3.5 requires,

"The RCS total flow rate shall be determined by precision heat balance

measurement at least once par 18 months." The licensee has established

l and implemented Surveillance Test STS RE-011, Revision 1, "RCS Total Flow

,

Rate Measurement," to accomplish this requirement.

l

l

The action statement for TS 3.2.3 states: "With the combination of RCS

total flow rate and R outside the region of acceptable operation shown on

Figure 3.2-3:

a. Within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> either:

(1) Restore the combination of RCS total flow rate and R to within

! the above limits, or

(2) Reduce THERMAL POWER to less than 50% of RATED THERMAL POWER and

reduce the Power Range Neutron Flux - High Trip Setpoint to less

than or equal to 55% of RATED THERMAL POWER within the next 4

hours.

!

.. .,.

-4-

b. Within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of initially being outside the above limits, verify

through incore flux mapping and RCS total flow rate comparison that

the combination of R and RCS total flow rate are restored to within

the above limits, or reduce THERMAL POWER to less than 5% of RATED

THERMAL POWER within the next 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />."

The licensee's failure to imediately take the actions s

Action Statement appears to be a violation (482/8705-01)pecified by the TS

.

The NRC inspectors requested the licensee personnel to evaluate the effect

-

of the feedwater flow corrections on the completed calorimetric

calculations to determine if the licensed power limit had been exceeded at

any time.

On February 5,1987, STS RE-011 was performed again and the RCS total flow

rate was calculated to be 395,800 gpm, which was greater than the required

minimum of 393,500 gpm; however, this calculated RCS total flow rate was

9900 gpm less than the Cycle 1 flow rate of 405,700 gpm. The difference

between the Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 RCS total flow rates will be reviewed

duringasubsequentinspectionandisanunresolveditem(482/8705-03).

Additionally, on February 5,1987, the NRC inspector determined by review

of the surveillance test routing sheet (STRS) for STS RE-011, Revision.1,

"RCS Total Flow Rate Measurement," (perfomed on January 14, 1987) and

discussions with the test performer that even though the total RCS flow

rate calculated in accordance with STS RE-011 was below the minimum flow

required by TS 3.2.3, the test performer did not, upon determination of

this test deficiency, perfom the activities required by section 6.7.1 of

Administrative Procedure ADM 02-300, Revision 8, " Surveillance Testing."

Section 5.4.1.3 of ADM 02-300 states that each test performer is

responsible for documenting and reporting all test deficiencies to the

shift supervisor. Section 6.7.1 of ADM 02-300 states the following:

"Upon determination of a Test Deficiency, the Test Perfomer shall:

. Notify Shift Supervisor

l . Document a brief description of the condition in the Test Deficiency

section of the STRS. (Section 3, Attachment 1)

. Initial and date in the Test Deficiency section of the STRS.

(Section 3, Attachme.it 1)."

STS RE-011 and ADM 02-300 have been established and implemented in

accordance with TS 6.8.1 and RG 1.33. TS 6.8.1 requires that, " Written

procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering

. . . a. The applicable procedure recommended in Appendix A of RG 1.33,

Revision 2, February 1978," Section 8 of Appendix A states that,

activities related to surveillance tests should be covered by written

l

f

.e

E

. u.

l

-5-

procedures. This failure to follow the requirements of

Procedure ADM 02-300 appears to be a violation of the above requirements

(482/8705-02).

-

3. Exit Meeting

The NRC inspectors met with licensee personnel to discuss the scope and

findings of this inspection on February 9,1987. At the exit meeting, the

licensee stated that they disagreed with the " Failure To Take Action

Specified by the Technical Specification Action Statement As Required"

finding discussed in paragraph 2. The licensee's disagreement was based on

the reasons given in paragraph 2 as to why the TS Action Statement was not

entered.

4

!

. -