ML20214R125
| ML20214R125 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1987 |
| From: | Udy A EG&G IDAHO, INC., IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214R118 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-D-6001 EGG-NTA-7553, EGG-NTA-7553-ERR, GL-83-28, TAC-55200, NUDOCS 8706050351 | |
| Download: ML20214R125 (15) | |
Text
1 l
EGG-NTA-7553 l
February 1987 l
INFORMAL REPORT
\\
Idaho CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 2.2.2.
i VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS ( ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED National COMPONENTS). CALLAWAY PLANT i
Engineering i
I.aboratory
/
Afanafpuf Alan C. Udy by tho U S.
Dey>altment 7
Of l.HOffly i
i l
l l
i l
l t
i l
l l'
drsss..
Preparna for eno
- 11. S NilCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
\\
n.,......n o,,,,,,
\\
IM >$ Cennfr.s i ha orAcut.vaw w t
I 07060D0351 070304 Apock0$00pp){
- 0H r
e o
e l
OlSCLAIMEA that book *se propste<J es en account of *orn tooneoted by en egency of the Uruted
$tetes Government. Netnet the United Statet Government not any agency thereof, not any of ther empovees, menee any mettenty, esprest of enolgd, et assumee any lege4 heMty at resoone.neleiv for the accuracy, competenees, or usefulness of any leformaison, epostetut, product or DroCost delClotel, of teptesentt that ett Wee would not infringe pitvetely owned ngntt. References herein to any locctfic comtnettlel 9toduCt Drucett, or eenrice by trade name, tradeteeth, menufactutet, of otherwee, does not neceteerily constitute et poty its endoteement, recommendation, of favottog by the Unitet! States Government of any egency thereof the vent and omnions of authott espressed here n do not neceowily itste or ref*t those of the United States Government or env egency the< eof i
e l
e
EGG-NTA-7553 l
l TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT l
l CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2, VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS ( ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATE 0 COMPONENTS),
CALLA 6 DAY PLANT I
Docket No. 50-483 l
l Alan C. Udy l
l l
Published February 1987 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
[G4G Idaho, Inc.
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Negu14 tory Comiglion teethington, D.C.
20555 Under DOE Contract No. DE AC07 761001570 FIN No. 06001
i A85 TRACT l
This EGMi Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittels from i
the Union Electric Company regarding conformance to Generte Letter 83 28 j
Itse 2.2.2 for the Callaway Plant.
1 i
1 Dochet No. 50 483 TAC No. 55100 11 l
r i
j FOREWORO This report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating licensee /appilcant conformance to Generic Letter 83-28, " Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events." This work is being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Consission, Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of PWR Licensing A, by EG6G Idaho, Inc., NRR j
and !&E Support Branch.
i The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded this work under the j
authorization 86R No. 20-1910-11-3, FIN No. 06001.
i i
~
i l
i
(
i I
[
i I
1 Docket No. 50-483 TAC No. 55200 1
E
[
4
CONTENTS r
ASSTRACT..............................................................
11 FOREWORO..............................................................
lit i
i 1.
INTRODUCTION.....................................................
1 t
2.
REVI(W CONTENT AND FORMAT........................................
2 l
l 3.
! TEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM OfSCRIPTION.................................
3
(
3.1 Guideline..................................................
3 3.2 Evaluation.................................................
3
[
l 3.3 Conclusion.................................................
4 i
L 4.
PROGRAM WHERE VENDOR INTERFACE CANNOT PRACTICA8LY BE l
(STA8LISHED......................................................
5 4.1 Guideline..................................................
5 i
4.2 Evaluation.................................................
5 4.3 Conclusion.................................................
6 5.
RESPONS!81 LIT![S OF LICENS(t/ APPLICANT ANO V(N00RS THAT PROV10(
SE RVICE ON SAFI TY.RE L AT[0 (QUIPME NT..............................
7 l
i 5.1 Guideline..................................................
7 l
5.2
[valuetton.................................................
7 i
5.3 Conclusion.................................................
7 l
l 6.
CONCLUSION.......................................................
8 l
l i
7.
REF(R(NCES.......................................................
9 i
l l
1 e
I r
W l
i r
v h
?
tv l
t t
I
CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 2.2.2.
1[N00R INTERF ACE PROGRAMS ( ALL OTHER SAFETY-REL ATED COMPONENTS).
CALLAWAY PLANT 1.
INTRODUCTION On February 25, 1983, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant failed to open upon an automatic reactor trtp
~
signal from the reactor protection system.
This incident was terminated manually by the operator abot.t 30 seconds after the initiation of the automatic trip signal.
The failure of the circuit breakers was determined to be related to the sticking of the undervoltage trip attachment. Prior to this incident, on February 22, 1983, at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, an automatic trip signal was generated based on steam generator low-low level during plant startup.
In this case, the reactor was tripped manually by the operator almost coincidentally with the automatic trip.
Following those incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC [nocutivo Otructor for Operations ([00), directed the NRC staff to investigate and report on the generic implications of these occurrences at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant.
The results of the staff's inquiry into the generic implications of the Salem unit incidents are reported in NURIG 1000. " Generic Implications of the ATWS [ vents at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant." As a result of this investigation, the Conenission (NRC)
I requested (by Generic Letter 03-20 dated July 8,1983 ) all licensees of operating reactors, applicants for an operating licensn And holders of construction permits to respond to the generic issues raised by the analyses of those two ATWS ovents, ihls report is an ovaluation of the respontos submitted by the Union Iloctrte Company, the licensee for the Callaway Plant, for Item 2.2.2 of Generic Letter 03 20, ihn documents reviewed as a part of this evaluation are listed in the references at the end of this report.
1
2.
REVIEW CONTENT ANO f0AMAT ltem 2.2.2 of Generic Letter 43 28 requests the licensee or appilcant to submit, for the staff review, a description of their programs for interfacing with the vendors of all safety-related components including supporting information, in considerable detall, as indicated in the guideline section for each case within this report.
These guidelines treat cases where direct vendor contact programs are pursued, treet cases where such contact cannot practically be established, and establish responsibilities of Ilconsees/appilcants and vendors that provide service on safety-related components or equipment.
As previously indicated, the cases of Item 2.2.2 are evaluated in a separate section in which the guideline is presented; an evaluation of the licensee's/ applicant's response is made: and conclusions about the programs of the licensee or applicant for their vendor interface program for safety related components and equipment are drawn.
2
3.
ITEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 3.1 Guideline The licensee or applicant response should describe their program for estabitshing and maintaining interfaces with vendors of safety-related components which ensures that vendors are contacted on a periodic basis and that receipt of vendor equipment technical information (ETI) is acknowledged or otherwise vertfled.
This program description should establish that such interfaces are established with their NSSS vendor, as well as with the vendors of key l
safety-related components such as diesel generators, electrical switchgear, auxillary feedpumps, emergency core cooling system (ECCS) pumps, batteries, l
battery Chargers, and valve operators, to faCilltate the exchange of Current technical information.
The description should verify that controlled procedures entst for handling this vendor technical information whlCh ensure that it is kept current and complete and that it is incorporated into plant l
operating, maintenance and test procedures as is appropriate.
3.2 Evaluation l
The licensee for the Callaway plant responded to these requirements with submittals dated November 10, 1983, March 12, 19d4 i
May 21, 1904,* December 27, 1904 and May 17, 1905.6 These submittals 4
include information that describe their past and current vendor interface programs.
In the review of the licensee's response to this item, it was assumed that the information and documentation supporting this program is l
available for audit upon request. We have reviewed this information and note the following.
l The 11contee states that they have implemented the Nucioar Utility Talk l
Action Comittee (NUTAC) Vendor [quipment Technical Information program f
(V(ilP).
This is supported by the following administrative procedurest 3
APA-ZZ-00530, QS-21, APA-ZZ-00141, APA-ZZ-00101, PDP-ZZ-00001 and 00002 PDP-ZZ-00004. EDP-ZZ-04012 and APA-ZZ-00401.
These proceudres are briefly described in Reference 6.
The licensee also describes an interface program with Westinghouse, the NSSS supplier.
It consists of controlled distribution of Westinghouse technical bulletins, acknowledgement of receipt and implementation as appropriate by the licensee.
3.3 E2nclusion We conclude that the licensee's response regarding program description iscompleteand,therefore, Acceptable.1 I
i 4
4.
PROGRAM WHERE VENDOR INTERFACE CANNOT PRACTICABLY BE ESTABLISHED 4.1 Guideline The licensee / applicant response should describe tneir program for compensating for the lack of a formal vendor interface where such an interface cannot be practicably estabitshed.
This program may reference the NUTAC/VETIP program, as described in INPO 84-010, issued in March 1984.
If the NUTAC/VETIP program is referenced, the response should describe how procedures were revised to properly control and implement this program and to incorporate the program enhancements described in Section 3.2 of the NUTAC/VETIP report.
It should also be noted that the lack of either a formal interface witn each vendor of safety-related equipment or a program to periodically contact each vendor of safety-related equipment will not relieve the licensee / applicant of his responsiblitty to obtain appropriate vendor instructions and information where necessary to provide adequate confidence that a structure, system or component will perform satisfactorily in service and to ensure adequate quality assurance in accordance with Appendix 8 to 10 CFR Part 50.
4.2 Evaluation In Reference 6, the licensee provided a brief description of the vendor interface program.
Their description references the NUTAC/VETIP program.
The licensee states that plant instructions and procedures are now in place to assure that the VETIP program is properly controlled and implemented.
VETIP is comprised of two basic elements related to vendor equipment problems; the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPROS) and the Signif tcant Event Evaluation and Information Network (SEE-IN) programs.
VETIP is designed to ensure that vendor equipment problems are recognized, evaluated and corrective action taken.
5
Through participation in the NPRDS program, the licensee submitts engineering information, failure reports and operating histories for review under the SEE-IN program.
Through the SEE-IN program, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) reviews nuclear plant events that have been reported through the NPROS programs and Nuclear Network and NRC reports.
Based on the significance of the event, as determined by the screening review, INPO issues a report to all utilities outlining the cause of the event, related problems and recommends practical corrective actions. These reports are issued in Significant Event Reports, and Significant Operating Experience Reports and as Operations and Maintenance Reminders.
Upon receipt of these documents, the licensee evaluates the information to determine applicability to the facility. This evaluation is documented and corrective actions are taken as determined necessary.
The licensee's response states that procedures now exist to review and evaluate incoming equipment technical information and to incorporate it into existing procedures.
4.3 Conclusion We find that the licensee's response to this concern is adequate and, therefore, acceptable.
+
6
.=. -
5.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF LICENSEE / APPLICANT AND VENDOR THAT PROVIDE SERVICE ON SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT 5.1 Guideline The licensee / applicant response should verify that the responsibilities of the licensee or applicant and vendors that provide service on safety-related equipment are defined such that control of applicable instructions for maintenance work on safety-related equipment are provided.
4 5.2 Evaluation The licensee, in Reference 6, committed to implement the NUTAC/VETIP program. They further state that their present and planned future practices and activities adequately implement this program.
The VETIP program includes implementation procedures for the internal handling of vendor services.
5.3 Conclusion We find the licensee's commitment to implement and use the VETIP program acceptable.
l 1
i l
l l
~
l l
7
6.
CONCLUSION Based on our review of the licensee's response to the specific requirements of Item 2.2.2, " Vendor Interface Programs for All Other Safety-Related Components," we find that the information provided by the licensee to resolve the concerns of this program meet the requirements of Generic Letter 83-28 and is acceptable.
l 8
i
7.
REFERENCES 1.
Letter, NRC (D. G. Eisenhut), to all Licensees of Operating Reactors, Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits,
" Required Actions Based on Generic Imp 1tcations of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983.
2.
Letter, Union Electric Company (D. F. Schnell) to NRC (H. R. Denton),
" Response to Generic Letter 83-28," November 18, 1983, ULNRC-687.
3.
Letter, Union Electric Company (D. F. Schnell) to NRC (H. R. Denton),
" Additional Responses to Generic Letter 83-28," March 12, 1984, ULNRC-763.
4.
Letter, Union Electric Company (D. F. Schnell) to NRC (H. R. Denton),
" Implementation of Generic Letter 83-28," May 21, 1984, ULNRC-829, 5.
Letter, Union Electric Company (D. F. Schnell) to NRC (H. 9. Denton),
" Generic Letter 83-28," December 27, 1984, ULNRC-1002.
6.
Letter, Union Electric Company (D. F. Schnell) to NRC (H. R. Denton),
" Generic Letter 83-28," May 17, 1985, ULNRC-1098.
D 9
n c
U.S. NUCLEAA LE&yLAtony GWaseOas
- AtPOAT Nuuttd fA__
~ 8v f'CC *se ver N.s. # aars W team m it een
- ,c,",;;y BISUOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-NTA-7553
$40 e%$TsuCTiCNS ON Tat af vteSE J LE AVE SLANE 2.TiTLS ANQ $68TITLS CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2, VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS (ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)
' : ^" ""c"' c " 5'
CALLAWAY PLANT ooNr.
February 1987
. Aw Y -o.,s >
. oan aucar 'ssvio Alan C. Udy
.oNT.
February 1987 a paQJECT TAsm.wsoma uhat NumetA 7 B(ApoAMcNG ORGANIIAflON NAMG AND MA846mG AOQagss uecome te ces,s EG&G Idaho, Inc.
P. O. Box 1625 Idaho Falls, ID 83415 06001 tia Yvet op stromi iQ SPCNsQmNG OAGANs2AfloN NAME ANO wailing ADO 841* #'astweele Cases Division of PWR Licensing - A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
. <aico coviaeo u
~..e --,
Washington, DC 20555 13 swPe((VENT 4st. NOTis
- ) AG3 f e 4CT sJW meres or esas This EG&G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from the Union Electric Company regarding conformance to Generic Letter 83-28, Item 2.2.2 for the Callaway Plant.
1 l
is avaiugig;Tv se oCCyutNT ANAssis. 4t vivopos,CtscaiaTCas ITATEWENT Unlimited Distribution 16 $$CupiTV CLAssspiCATICN ITran gepop Unc1assified
...ciNT..si izC. N.No o Ti. s g Thng r000999 Unclassified
~e.... c,..o u l
i....C.
-,.. _,. ~ _. _,
.- - - _.