IR 05000382/1998201

Forwards Insp Rept 50-382/98-201 on 980511-0619.Insp Was to Evaluate Capability of Sys to Perform Safety Functions Required by Design Bases.No Violations Identified

ML20211N995
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	07/27/1998
From:	Norkin D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Dugger C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
Shared Package
ML20211P001	List: IR 05000382/1998201 IR 05000382/1999201
References
50-382-98-201, NUDOCS 9909130117
Download: ML20211N995 (5)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ----_ .

+ 1 4 g #*4 g 4, * k   UNITED STATES j
,

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

$  $  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20566 4001
%Q***** f   July 27,1998 Charles M. Dugger, Vice President Operations - Waterford 3 Entergy Operations, Inc.

P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 SUBJECT: DESIGN INSPECTION OF WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-382/98-201)

Dear Mr. Dugger:

On May 11 through June 19,1998, the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), inspection Program Branch, performed a design inspection of the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. The inspection focused on the low pressure safety injection / shutdown cooling (LPSI/SDC) systems, emergency feedwater (EFW) system as well as their support-interface systems. The purpose of the inspection was to evaluate the capability of these systems to perform the safety functions 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 final safety analysis report (FSAR).

The enclosed report presents the results of this inspection.

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.

The team identified examples where adions were not adequate to identify and correct conditions adverse to quality. Failure of a nonsafety-relaisd pressure regulator in the nitrogen system could affect the safety functions of both trains of EFW system flow control and isolation valves, as well as both trains of several other safety-related systems, because the relief valve to protect the safety systems did not meet safety, code and size requirements. Although this was an original design deficiency, your staff had several opportunities to identify and correct this issue.

During this inspection, your staff replaced the undersized relief valve. In addition, the team identified programmatic concems with evaluating 10 CFR Part 21 reports for conditions adverse to quality. The team identified that a 10 CFR Part 21 notification issued in 1994 on Agastat relays was not evaluated to determine if the condition was adverse to quality at Waterford 3.

During the inspection, your staff identified 13 other 10 2' revi wgthat wergg" performed. ,,P fG ld) IJUf The team identified deficiencies in 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations. For example, the FSAR was revised to reflect a deviation from Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.9. However, the safety evaluation failed to identify an unreviewed safety question concerning potential overlapping of emergency diesel generator loads and frequency response less than specified in RG 1.9. In addition, the safety evaluation concemihg

  ,v battbry replacements did not identify the effect on the Technical 9909130117 980727
{DR ADOCK 0500      [q
       - -

   -   1 y , is-    a
    '

Mr. Cheries < '

, Specifications, nor the redentions in battery duty' cycle time and battery charger charging time.  .

Furthermore, the team noted that NRC. (Inspecten Report 50-382/97-25 ) has recently

: Identified a violation of 10 CFR 50.59 requirements for a USQ issue regarding the reduction of L EFW flow values.'
  .
: A number of issues identified by the team indicated a need to emphasize design and configuration control management in maintaining the design and licensing bases._ The analyses supporting ' the design'and licensing bases did not always consider the limiting worst-case -

L effects of potential single active failures. Interactions were sometimes not adequately evaluated between nonsafety and safety systems, as well as between interfacing systems,. With regard to testing, the team identified deficiencies in the surveillance testing of containment

: sump isolation valves; inservice testing of the EFW discharge check valves; test procedures to reduce radioactive leakage from the systems outside the containment; and accuracy of '
' instruments used for pump tests.

Please provide a schedule, within 60 days, detailing your plans to complete the corrective i actions for the open items listed in Appendix A of the enclosed report. This schedule will , enable the NRC staff to plan for the reinspection and closeout of these items.

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 the NRC's October 9,1996, request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding the adequacy and availability of design basis information.

. in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be placed in the

- NRC Public Document Room. The NRC Region IV office will issue any enforcement actions   l resulting from this inspection via separate correspondence. Should you have any' questions   I
' concoming the enclosed inspection report, please contact the project manager, Mr. C.P. Patel  q at (301) 415-3025, or the inspection team leader, Mr. R.K. Mathew at (301) 415-2965.

.

Sincerely, Original signed by: n Donald P. Norkin, Chief l Operating Reactor inspection Support Section inspection Program Branch I Division of Inspection and Support Programs

         {

l_

>

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation L Docket No.: 50-382 Enclosure: Inspection Report 50-382/98-201,

cc w/ Enclosure: See next page DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SEC.Y2\ WATER. FIN. ~ * See previous concurrence.

To receive a copy of this document. Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy OFFICE PIPB: DISP PIPBQLSP y PIPB; DISP l l l NAME RKMathew * DPNorkinM JNHannon * DATE 07/27/98 - 07/M W 07/27/98

   . ' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ,
    -
  . , ,
  ;       !

b

[' l l- s a-

To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No

.

copy -a l OFFICE PIPB: DISP , , PIPB: DISP DRPW:N$R \ ' NAME RKMathew (M)A. . DPNorkin JNHannonVrek

  '       l DATE 07/zf97  07/ /98  0701/98  -   1
      ,-   )
  .
      /   >

1 l l '

 , /
 -{

l l

         (

I

         >

, a a.

. Mr. Charles Specifications, nor the reductions in battery duty cycle time and battery charger charging time.

Furthermore, the team noted that NRC (Inspection Report 50-382/97-25) has recently identified a violation of 10 CFR 50.59 requirements for a USQ issue regarding the reduction of EFW flow values.

A number of issues identified by the team indicated a need to emphasize design and configuration control management in maintaining the design and licensing bases. The analyses supporting the design and licensing bases did not always consider the limiting worst-case effects of potential single active failures. Interactions were sometimes not adequately evaluated between nonsafety and safety systems, as well as between interfacing systems,. With regard to testing, the team identified deficiencies in the surveillance testing of containment sump isolation valves; inservice testing of the EFW discharge check valves; test procedures to

. reduce radioactive leakage from the systems outside the containment; and accuracy of instruments used for pump tests.

Please provide a schedule, within 60 days, detailing your plans to complete the corrective actions for the open items listed in Appendix A of the enclosed report. This schedule will enable the NRC staff to plan for the reinspection and closeout of these items.

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 the NRC's October 9,1996, request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding the adequacy and availability of design basis information.

la E r,cordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. The NRC Region IV office will issue any enforcement actions resulting from this inspection via separate correspondence. Should you have any questions conceming the enclosed inspection report, please contact the project manager, Mr. C.P. Patel j at (301) 415-3025, or the inspection team leader, Mr. R.K. Mathew at (301) 415-2965. j I

Sincerely, hi\. Donald P. Norkin, Chief Operating Reactor Inspection Support Section Inspection Program Branch Division of inspection and Support Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No.: 50-382 Enclosure: Inspection Report 50-382/98-201 cc w/ Enclosure: See next page i

. , ,

. O Entergy Operations, Inc. Waterford 3 cc: Administrator _ Regional Administrator, Region IV Louisiana Radiation Protection Division U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 82135 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2135 Arlington,TX 76011 Vice President, Operations Resident inspector /Waterford NPS Support Post Office Box 822 Entergy Operations, Inc. Killona, LA 70066 P. O. Box 31995 Jackson, MS 39286 Parish President Council St. Charles Parish Director P. O. Box 302 Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Affairs Hahnville, LA 70057 Entergy Operations, Inc. ', P. O. Box B Executive Vice-President Killona, LA 70066 and Chief Operating Officer Entergy Operations, Inc.

Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway P. O. Box 31995 P. O. Box 651 Jackson, MS 39286-1995 Jackson, MS 39205 Chairman General Manager Plant Opdrations - Louisiana Public Service Commission Entergy Operations, Inc. One American Place, Suite 1630 P. O. Box B Baton Rouge, LA 70825-1697 Killona, LA 70066 Licensing Manager Vice President Operations Entergy Operations, Inc. Entergy Operations, Inc.

P. O. Box B P. O. Box B Killona, LA 70066 Killona, LA 70066 Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20005-3502

,

}}