ML20214R726

Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.2.2 - Vendor Interface Programs for All Other Safety-Related Components: Fermi-2, Final Informal Rept

ML20214R726
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	03/31/1987
From:	Udy A EG&G IDAHO, INC., IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
To:	NRC
Shared Package
ML20214R717	List: ML20214R714 ML20214R726
References
CON-FIN-D-6002 EGG-NTA-7574, GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8706080277
Download: ML20214R726 (16)

Text

._ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _

EGG-NTA-7574

, March 1987

, INFORMAL REPORT I

idaho CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 2.2.2--

Eng/neer/ng VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-Laboratory RELATED COMPONENTS: FERMI-2 Managed by the U.S.

Department A1an C. Udy ofEncrgy I

l I

l l

l i

l l

l l

l hEGamu~

w ue w w fure., Prepared for the y, uusVslT! U.S. flVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10ft i

0706000277 9793y6 yDif ADOCK 0D000341 l

(

PDIt i

e s . ..

9 1

I l

t l

l OlSCLAIMER l This book was prepared as an account cf work sconse.ed by an agency of the United States Government. Nenhor the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of thw empiovees, menos any warranty, express or vnphed, or assumes any legal habihty or resoons.bihty for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not intnnge onvetely owned nghts. References herein to any specife commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessanly constitute or vnpty its endorsement, recommendation, or favonng by the United States Government or any agancy thereof. The views and opsnions of authors esprorsed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency the<*of

EGG-NTA-7574 TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT W

CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2--

VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS:

FERMI 2 Docket No. 50-341 Alan C. Udy Published March 1987 1

l Idaho National Engineering Laboratory l EG&G Idaho, Inc.

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

. Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-761001570 FIN No. 06002 l

_ _ _ ..~ - . - . _ . ._, . . - _ _.

< --s t

4 i

i j ' e-i

(

j I

1 1

4 ABSTRACT e

j This EG&G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from' Detroit Edison regarding conformance to Generic Letter 83-28, Item 2.2.2, *

, for Fermi 2.

I-

1 I

i i

i i

1 i

I i

l 1

f 1

i -

l 1

i t'

Docket No. 50-341

! 11 J

I h

I

r>

b i FOREWORD i-This report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating licensee / applicant 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 Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of PWR Licensing-A, by EG&G Idaho, Inc., NRR and I&E Support Branch.

', The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded this work under the authorization B&R No. 20-19-40-41-3, FIN No. 06002.

i i

. Docket No. 50-341 3

111

CONTENTS ABSTRACT .............................................................. 11 FOREWORD .............................................................. iii

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... I

2. REVIEW CONTENT AND FORMAT ........................................ 2

3. ITEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ................................. 3 3.1 Guideline .................................................. 3 3.2 Evaluation ................................................. 3 3.3 Conclusion ................................................. 4

4. PROGRAM WHERE VENDOR INTERFACE CANNOT PRACTICABLY BE ESTABLISHED ...................................................... 5 4.1 Guideline .................................................. 5 4.2 Evaluation ................................................. 5 4.3 Conclusion ................................................. 6

5. RESPONSIBILITIES OF LICENSEE / APPLICANT AND VENDORS THAT PROVIDE SERVICE ON SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT .............................. 7 5.1 Guideline .................................................. 7 5.2 Evaluation ................................................. 7

5.3 Conclusion ................................................. 7

6. CONCLUSION ........................................................ 8

7. REFERENCES ....................................................... 9 O

=

iv-

I CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2--  ;

l VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS:

FERMI-2

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 trip signal from the reactor protection system. This incident was terminated manually by the operator about 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 these incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO), 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 NUREG-1000, " Generic Implications of the ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant." As a result of this investigation, the Commission (NRC) 1 requested (by Generic Letter 83-28 dated July 8, 1983 ) all licensees of operating reactors, applicants for an operating license, and holders of construction permits to respond to the generic issues raised by the analyses of these two ATW3 events.

This report is an evaluation of the responses submitted by Detroit Edison, the applicant for Fermi 2, for Item 2.2.2 of Generic Letter 83-28.

~

The documents reviewed as a part of this evaluation are listed in the references at the end of this report.

1

2. REVIEW CONTENT AND FORMAT Item 2.2.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 requests the licensee or applicant 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 detail, as indicated in the guideline section for each case within this report. e These guidelines treat cases where direct vendor contact programs are pursued, treat cases where such contact cannot practically be established, and establish responsibilities of licensees / applicants 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.

e i

2

3. ITEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM DESCRIPTION l 3.1 Guideline The licensee or applicant response should describe their program for-establishing and maintaining interfaces with vendors of safety-related components which ensures that vendors are contacted on a periodic basis and

! w that receipt of vendor equipment technical information (ETI) is acknowledged or otherwise verified.

! Tnis program description should establish that such interfaces are-l established with their NSSS vendor, as well as.with the vendors of key l

safety-related components such as diesel generators, electrical switchgear, auxiliary feedpumps, emergency core cooling system (ECCS) pumps,. batteries, j battery chargers, and valve operators, to facilitate the exchange of current technical information. The description should verify that controlled procedures exin for handling this vendor technical information which ensure that it is kept current anc complete and that it is-incorporated into plant operating, maintenance and test procedures as is appropriate.

3.2 Evaluation The applicant for Fermi 2 responded to these requirements with submittals dated November 3, 1983,2 November 29, 19843-and July 5, 1985.4 These submittals include information that describes their past and current vendor interface programs. In the review of the applicant's response to this item, it was assumed that the information and documentation supporting this program is available for audit upon request.

We have reviewed this information and note the following.

. The applicant states that they have implemented.the Nuclear Utility Task Action Committee (NUTAC) program titled Vendor Equipment Technical

- Information Program (VETIP). They state, in Reference 3, that they have administrative guidelines in place that are consistent with the NUTAC l

3

_ _ _ _. _ .. __ _ _ _ - ~ _ _ . _ . _

.I guidance-on 1) participation with the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS), 2) an operating experience review group, and 3) an improved vendor i information program.

The applicant states, in. Reference 2, that administrative and project I procedures exist that cover the receipt, control, storage and distribution of vendor drawings, documents, operation manuals and maintenance manuals. ,

Also, that procedures for the technical review, approval and control of the use' of this vendor information, and any revisions to these documents, ,

~

exist. These procedures have existed from the design and construction of the station. The applicant outlines enhancements to these original procedures to bring them into conformance with the NUTAC/VETIP program.

~

The applicant has an Automated Records Management System (ARMS) to list document, status, review number, the document number,.the originator of the

document and reference.to-the component or sub-system. The Production Information Center maintains and distributes to users a current, controlled i i copy of the document requested.

The applicant's nuclear procurement departnent initiates vendor contact t to obtain updates and new pertinent information from vendors of  !

I j safety-related components. The nuclear engineering and the nuclear production departments review, evaluate and approve vendor information before it enters the Production Information Center, where it will be used i

and incorporated in accordance with plant procedures and instructions.

i

! 3.3 Conclusion

f. We conclude that the applicant's response regarding program description is complete and, therefore, acceptable.

)

i i i l

l 4

l I

1 4

1

~

4. PROGRAM WHERE VENDOR INTERFACE CANNOT' PRACTICABLY BE ESTABLISHED '

l 4.1 Guideline t l l

The licensee / applicant res;onse should describe their program for l

^

compensating for the lack of a formal vendor interface where such an interface cannot be practicably established. 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 with each vendor of' safety-related equipment or a program to periodically contact each vendor of I safety-related equipment will not relieve the licensee / applicant of his responsibility to obtain appropriate vendor instructions and information ,

I 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 B to-10'CFR Part 50.

4.2 Evaluation i In Reference 2, the applicant provided a brief description of the i

vendor interface program. Their e,8escription references the NUTAC/VETIP program. The applicant states thAt plant instructions and procedures are

,' now in place to assure that the VyTIP program is properly controlled and implemented, l

[ VETIP is comprised of two basic elements related to vendor equipment

problems; the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS) and the Significant Event Evaluation and Information Network (SEE-IN) programs.

VETIP is designed to ensure that vendor equipment problems are recognized, evaluated and correct,1ve action taken, j

i 5 t

_ , _ . . . . . _ . - _ _ _ , , _ _ . . ,, _ . _ _ . - - . . . _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _.__.-_a_ -, _ ,_

Through participation in the NPROS program, the applicant submits j 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 NPRDS programs and Nuclear Network and NRC reports.

Based on the significance of the event, as determined by the screening review, INP0 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 applicant evaluates the information to determine applicability to the facility. This evaluation is documented and I corrective actions are taken as determined necessary.

4 The applicant's response indicates that procedures exist to review and evaluate incoming equipment technical information and to incorporate it into existing procedures.

t 4.3 Conclusion

We find that the licensee's response to this concern is adequate and, therefore, acceptable.

l l

l 1

l I

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.

5.2 Evaluation The licensee, in References 2, 3 and 4, 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.

4 9

)

l 7 l l

j

~

6 .- CONCLUSION Based on our review of the licensee's' response to the specific requirements of Item 2.2.2, 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.

e d

l 1

I 8

l

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 Implications of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983.

2. Letter, Detroit Edison (W. H. Jens) to NRC (B. J. Youngblood),

" Detroit Edison Response to NRC Generic Letter 83-28,"

November 3, 1983, EF2-66,117.

. 3. Letter, Detroit Edison (W. H. Jens) to NRC (B. J. Youngblood),

"Clairification of Detroit Edison's Response to Generic Letter 83-28,"

November 29, 1984, EF2-72014.

4. Letter, Detroit Edison (W. H. Jens) to NRC (B. J. Youngblood),

" Detroit Edison's Updated Status to NRC Generic Letter 83-28,"

July 5, 1985, VP-85-0134.

J e

9 I

U.S. muCLEAL L41ULATORY C-

-- - i ntPom f Nuweld , ass. gass e, reoc ner var 44, .#,ay, hAC i 1Am 335 12 448

aC",';*2- BISUOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-NTA-7574 Sat 14578 JCTICNS ON TM4 stvimSt J Lieve SLANE 3 fivLt a 40 5bef arkt CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2--

VENE0R INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS: FERMI-2 ,,,',,'""**g' **"'"....

5 . ..c. . 5, March 1987

.o.nat, car.nuto Alan C. Qdy wQNTw vt.a March l 1987

, . t .c..,~o c.s . z.1,o ,..t .~o ...s,~ .oo.ul u.a. u cas., ...o.ACr.r. .c..u ,1~o..t.

EG&G Idaho, Inc.

P. O. Box 1625 , ..~ oa ca.~ r ~u .la Idaho Falls, ID 83415 06002 .

'O SPONSCRsNG oAGA*sszATION N Awt 440.as46NG AOCats5 stace,se te case, its typeoratPomi Division of PWR Licensing - A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission """'"'"'"'"**"'

Washington, DC 20555 2 We*L49 TNT &Av%QTt5 t 3 A45TeaCT eJ00 wores er esas This EG&G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from Detroit Edison regarding conformance to Generic Letter 83-28 Item 2.2.2, for Fermi-2.

i l

le QQCUMe%T Amatvlil .e .t vWQaGS of 5GaseTQ*5 15 Ava 8 bi T V e Unlimited '

Distribution to 54Cumetv CLA5868ICAfiCN o r.. ,,,

.aet ri ital.Cn~ 4~cto na 5 Unclassified

, r.. r ,

Unclassified i , ~u..l a o. ..o n it #mict

_ _ _ - , _ _ . _ _ _ _ , _ _