ML20246H354
| ML20246H354 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/03/1989 |
| From: | Blumberg N, Finkel A, Oliveira W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246H326 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-271-89-05, 50-271-89-5, NUDOCS 8905160073 | |
| Download: ML20246H354 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000271/1989005
Text
-
.
._
. _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
__ _
'
i
,.
,3
,
4
e
.
.
L
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-271/89-05
Docket No. 50-271
- License No.
Licensee: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation
RD 5 Box 169, Ferry Road
Brattleboro, Vermont 05301
'
Facilit'y Name:
Vermont Yankee Nuclear power Station
-Inspection At:
Vernon, Vermont-
Inspection Conducted: April 4-7, 1989
UW
b
f
Inspectors:
A. Finkel, S'enior Reactor Engineer
date'
'I
4
W. 0 iveira, Reactor Engineer
d' ate '
d Cm
[
h
- Approved by:7 'J u'mberg, Ch'ief, Operational Programs
/ fate /
N.
5ection, 08,'DRS
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on April 4-7, 1989 (Inspection Report No.
50-271/89-05)
Areas. Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection consisting of the review and
implementation of the ATWS Rule 10 CFR 50.62; open items identified in pre-
viously issued NRC inspection reports; surveillance and calibration program;
and quality assurance / quality control interface with surveillance testing.
Results: Licensee is complying with the ATWS Rule 10 CFR 50.62. The quality
organization appears adequately staffed to support the present operation of
this site. ' Surveillance testing and the calibration program are following the
licensee established program plan. During this inspection unresolved items
85-26-01, 87-08-01 and 87-18-02 were closed. No violations or deviations were
identified.
8905160073 890504
ADOCK 05000271
0
- _________-:___-__-_--_____-__---__--___-_-_-__-__-_-_--_____-
_ - _ - _ _ _ -
-
-_- - ______ _
-
-
_- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - - _ _ _ _ _
__
-.
__
_
. _ _ _
_ . _ - _ _ __
'
.
.l
4
.
.
1
Details
1.0 Persons Contacted
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation
.P. Donnelly, Maintenance Superintendent
- R. Grippardi, Quality Assurance Supervisor
- R. Pagondin, Technical Services Superintendent
- J. Pelletier, Plant Manager
D. Reid, Operations Support Manager
S. Skibniowsky, Chemistry Supervisor
R. Spinney, Training Manager
W. Wiltmer, Construction Superintendent
<
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
G. Grant, Senior Resident Inspector
The inspectors also held discussions with other licensee personnel during
the course of this inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting on April 7, 1989.
2.0 Follow-up of Previous Inspection Findings (92706)
(Closed) Unresolved Item'85-26-01 - Establish qualification and
certification requirements of receiving inspector (QAT) in accordance
with ANSI N45.2.6-78. The job description for the quality assurance
technician (QAT) was revised November 3, 1985 and approved on
January 16, 1986.
The revised QAT job description reflects the intent of
ANSI N45.2.6-1978, paragraph 3.5.2, Level II in the area of schooling and
experience.
The inspector reviewed the present QAT personnel records and
verified that their qualifications comply with the licensee's revised job
description requirements. This item is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (87-08-01) - QDR Manual Requirements were not
followed during maintenance of the RHR motors. The licensee's equipment
manual recommended that the motor oil be changed at six month intervals.
The maintenance program for the RHR motors required the oil to be
replaced during each refueling cycle.
During the third quarter of 1987,
,
General Electric (GE) completed an evaluation of the electric motor
a
maintenance program at Vermont Yankee. GE's recommendation to the
licensee on the subject of motor oil lubrication stated that oil
lubricated motors should be sampled every six months and the oil changed
every outage.
I
l
. _ _ .
- . ' _ _ - _ _ _ _ . - - - - - _ . _ . . _
._-_._.-.-_--L._..
--
_ . - . - - _ . _ . . _ . . - _
_
- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _
-
_.
_ - _ _ _ - _
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
'
.
.
.
.
.
3
The Vermont Yankee maintenance procedures require that oil be changed at
i
refueling outages based on plant history records and motor test results.
The Maintenance Department does not plan to. perform cil sampling as
recommended by GE unless their test data indicates a motor problem. Based
on' their historical records and test hta results for their RHR motors,
,
the inspector concurred that their prm*nt oil replacement program is
1
acceptable. This item is closed.
j
(Closed) Unresolved Item (87-18-02) - Maintenance Department failed to
classify activities into major-minor inspection criteria as defined in
procedure AP-6025. The licensee specifies the inspection criteria in
.
their individual department procedures and uses the peer inspection
.
'
process to perform first level inspection of the task.
Procedure AP-6025
{
was revised on April 25,.1988 to delete the requirement for using the
'
major-minor method of classifying inspection criteria. The surveillance
and audit inspections were performed by the quality organization as
'
defined in their quality control program for this site.
To ensure that the'Ap-6025 revision removing the requirement for major-minor
classification did not present a safety concern, the inspector reviewed
the QA Surveillance Reports88-130 on the Instrumentation and Control Depart-
ment-and 88-113 on the Mairitenance Department, which evaluated the effective-
ness of the revised AP-6025.
These surveillance reports and the inspector's
evaluation of sampled surveillance performed during 1988-1989 indicated
<
that the departments were complying with the criteria defined in Ap-6025
without an apparent lessening of work quality or safety. This item is
closed.
3.0 Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS) Rule,10 CFR 50.62 (.2500/20)
3.1 Scope:
The scope of the inspection was to determine that the Vermont Yankee's
(VY) present system design complies with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.62, paragraphs C (3), (4), (5), (d), and that their test programs
l
are designed to ensure that the Alternate Rod Injection (ARI), Standby
Liquid Control System (SLCS), and the recirculation pumps will function
as designed under conditions indicative of an ATWS.
The documentation
that was reviewed by the inspectors and used in the validation of the
design and test data reviews are listed in Attachment A of this report.
__
__
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ .
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _
-
.
.
.
.
.
4
l
!
3.2 Alternate Rod Injection (ARI) System and Recirculation Pumps
3.2.1
Description of Modification:
To comply with the independence criteria of 10 CFR 50.62,
paragraph C, the ARI system is designed so that upon a high
pressure or low water level sigual the system relays, which
are in a de-energized state, will energize and trip the
reactor. The Reactor Prctection System (RPS) upon a high
pressure or low water level signal will de-energize causing a
The VY ARI has a 10 second time delay added to provide for longer
core flow during level decrease transients, to assure adequate
core cooling, before the recirculation pumps are shut down. The
high reactor vessel pressure trip signals opens the GE AKF-2-25
motor generator (MG) field breakers which supply the voltage for
the recirculation pumps thus causing the pumps to stop and coast
down.
Both the RPS and the ARI systems remove the air supply
from their scram valves, causing these solenoids valves to open
thus providing a reactor scram signal.
are redundant from the sensors to the activating devices, however,
the level transmitters and the logic cards are the same manufacture
(Rosemount 1152T0280's), but completely redundant.
3.2.2
Finding:
To ensure that the ARI installed system complied with the
system design criteria and that the test program demonstrated
the operation of the system, the inspector verified tne
installed equipment of one train of the ARI system from the
sensor to the tripping relay devices.
The inspector also
reviewed the system surveillance test data from 1988 through the
first quarter of 1989; verified that the ARI train was installed
per the design drawings; and verified that the test data
determined that the ARI system was functional.
This item is
closed.
3.3 Standby Licuid Control System (SLCS)
3.3.1
Description of Modification:
The ATWS rule, 10 CFR 50.62C, (4), requires all BWR's to modify
4
their SLCS to be equivalent in control capacity to an 86 gpm
injection rate of 13% sodium pentaborate solution. The 86 grita
,
__
_ _ - _
,
.
,
, .
.
-
4
5
q
and 13% values stated in the ATWS rule were based on a reactor
vessel size of 251-inch diameter.
Vermont Yankee's reactor
vissel size is a 205-inch diameter vessel and based on this -
' their safety analysis establish different rates.
VY is also
using a higher inventory of Boron-10.
The use of Boron-10
isotope provides the neutron absorption (negative reactivity)
required to shutdown the reactor if the RPS and ARI- systems do
not. Yankee Atomic Electric Company calculation (VY C-572)
determined the minimum Boron-10 aton' percent to be 43, based on
a 41 gpm injection rate, to meet the ATWS 10 CFR 50.62C, '4)
rule for SLC equivalency.
'
3.3.2
Fitidings:
The inspector reviewed the pump test and chemistry reports for
1988 through the first quarter of 1989 to ensure that the system
design and the chemistry concentration of the SLCS complied with
the requirements of calculation VY C-572.
The pump tests _and
the corrected chemistry data results were within the VY C-572
calculation requirements for this system design.
During this inspection, the refueling SLCS serve 111ance test per
Procedure No. OP4114 was performed. The data had not yet been
approved through the licensee's data review system during this
,
inspection period; however, test data reviewed by the. inspector-
appeared to be within the requirements of the test procedure.
The test data supported the VY C-5'/2 calculations for the pump
injection rate and the chemical concentration of the SLCS tank.
In addition, the refueling surveillance test, OP 4114, also met
the VY C-572 flow criteria. The above data reviewed by the
inspector complied with the VY Technical Specification (TS)
section 3.4 Limiting Condition for Operation and 4.4
Surveillance Requirements. .This item is closed.
4.0 Complex Surveillance (61701) and Testing / Calibration (61725)
4.1 Scope:
The inspector observed selected tests to determine if the tests were:
(1) performed in accordance with approved Instrument and Control
(I&C) and Maintenance surveillance / test procedures; (2) properly
administrative 1y controlled, and (3) were performed by trained and
qualified personnel.
,
-
_-
_ __
_
_
- _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - -_
,
,
1%
,'
.
6
"
p
4.2 Findirns:
4.2.1 Surveillance / Test Program:
The surveillance / test program was well documented and
administrative 1y controlled by the Engineering Support
Department (ESD), the Maintenance Department, and the I&C
Department. The key procedures for administering the
surveillance program are Administrative Procedures (AP) 0200
(Maintenance), AP 0310 (I&C) and AP 4000 (ESD).
Departmental
procedures (DPs) provided the details. for implementing the
,
surveillance program. These procedures and other documents
,
referenced in the inspection report are listed in Attachment A.
4.2.2 Surveillance Program Activities:
The performance of two I&C surveillance tests and one
Maintenance test listed below were observed to assess the
surveillance and test / calibration effort for: administrative
controls) test procedure technical content; planning and timely.
performance of the tests; QA coverage; corrective actions;
reporting and analyzing the results (data); and post test
restoration.
,
Vibration tests by the Maintenance Department of the core
-
spray pump in accordance with OP 4123.
Reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system A/B isolation
-
logic test in accordance with OP 4368.
Automatic initiation test of the Primary Containment Isolation
-
System (PCIS) valves in accordance with OP 4334.
The above tests were satisfactorily performed. However, while
observing performance of OP 4334 the inspector noted that step
57 required the actuation of PCIS valves A-20, A-22A and A-228
in the Control Room.
The arrangement of Control Room Panel 9-3
was, however, changed by EDCR No.86-411 and these valves were
redesignated NI-20, NI-22A and NI-22B, respectively. AP 6004
and YNSD WE-100 requires procedures and drawings affected by an
EDCR to be corrected. A Plant Operations Review Committee
(PORC) approved EDCR 86-411 without verifying that the "no
procedural changes required," statement of the data package was
correct. Documents AP 0155 and control room drawing 191175,
which designate valve numbers, were not changed per the approved
EDCR 86-411.
The licensee acknowledged the error and initiated
actions to correct the error and determine the root cause of why
the EDCR process did not identify these documents. The
inspector had no further questions.
'
.
.
I
_
_ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
-
.
7
I
i
4.2.3
QA/QC Interfaces with Surveillance Testing:
.
Five annual QA audit reports and six QA surveillance reports
listed in attachment A sections 2.3 and 2.4 were reviewed
j
by the inspector. The reports were comprehensive and the
i
corrective action resp 0nses were complete and timely.
A Quality Service Department (,
tor was observed
performing surveillance inspection of the PCIS valves
automatic initiation test of OP'4334. The QSD inspector
documented the NRC inspectors concern regarding the PCIS
valves discussed in paragraph 4.2.2 and placed in the
licensee's corrective action system.
4.3
Conclusion:
j
i
The surveillance / test and calibration effort is documented and
!
1mplemented satisfactorily by qualified personnel. The licensee
has initiated action to determine the root cause regarding the
proper implementation of the EDCR process discussed in paragraphs
i
4.2.2 and 4.2.3.
!
5.0 Exit Interview
,
Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the
inspection at the entrance interview on April 4,1989. At the conclusion
I
of the site inspection on April 7, 1989, an exit itterview was conducted
with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted in section 1).
The fir. dings were identified and the status of previous inspection
findings were discussed.
At no tiCE during this inspection Was written material provided to the
licensee by the inspector. Based on the NRC Region I review of this
report and discussions held with licensee representatives during this
inspection, it was determined that this report does not contain
ir. formation subject to 10~CFR 2.790 restrictions.
1
l
l
1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
'
.
.
-
.
!
I
I
i
Attachtnent A
1
l
1.0 Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS)
1
l
1.1 Alternate Rod Injection (ARI) Documentation
l
l
RPS Instrumentation and Control Drawings 850-851 and 855-856
AR1 Instrumentation and Control Drawings 860-867
RPS Level Drawing - Rosemont 1152T0280
ARI Level Drawing - Rosemont 1152T0280
RPS Logic Trip Drawings 803-828
ARI Logic Trip Drawings 862
RPS/ARI Scram Valve Drawing G;91170
Operations Procedure (0P) 4337 - Reactor Water Level ECCS
Initiation, Isol, Funct/Cali-
bration, Revision 21,
March 31,1989
Operations Procedure (OP) 4342 - Rx Pressure RPT/ARI/Eccs
Func/ Calibration, Revision 8,
January 25, 1989
Operations Procedure (OP) 4369 - RPT/ARI Operational Test,
Revision 3, January 5, 1989
1.2 Standby Liquid Control System (SLCS)
Calculation VYC-572 - Yankee Atomic Electric Company SLCS Design
Calculation
Operations Procedure (OP) 4611 - Sampling and Treatment of the
Standby Liquid Control System
Operations Procedure (OP) 4611.01 - Standby Liquid Control
Sy5. tem Treatment Request
Operations Procedure (OP) 4611.02 - Analysis of Enriched Boric
Acid, Enriched Sodium
Pentaborate Decahydrate,
Borax and Sodium Pentaborate
Solution for % B-10
Composition
Operations Procedure (0P) 0630 - Water Chemistry
_
- _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .
.
.
, ,
'
'
,
'1
Attachment A
2
Operations Procedure (0P) 2114 - Operation of the Standby
Liquid Control System
Operations Procedure (OP) 4114 - Standby Liquid Control System
Surveillance
Department' Procedure (DP) 0641 - Procedure for Logging Results
of Chemical Analysis
i
Drawing 191171 - Standby Liquid Cantrol Flow Diagram
,
SLCS Surveillance Test Reports 1981 - First Quarter 1989
-
1.3 Reactor Recirculating Pumps
.
B-19130 (SH702) - Control Wiring Diagram - Reactor Recirculating
!
Motor Generator Set MGI-1A Field Breaker
B-191301 (SH803) - Reactor Protection System - Reacter Scram
.
Sensors - Channel Al
2.0 Complex Surveillance and Testing / Calibration.
2.1 Administrative Procedures
Administrative Procedure (AP) 0155 - Current System Valve and
Breaker Lineup and Identification, Revision 11, March 2, 1988
AP 0200 - Maintenance Program, Revision 11, July 1, 1987
AP 0310, Surveillance Preventative and Corrective Maintenance
Program, Revisian 3, August 12, 1988
AP 4000 - Surveillance Testing Control, Revision 10,
July 20,1988
AP 6004 - Engineering Design Change Requests, Revision 12,
November 3, 1988
Yankee Nuclear Services Division Engineering Instruction
WE-190, Engineering Design Change Request, Revision 17,
February 15, 1989
Quality Assurance Department Procedure 0QA-X-1, Quality
e
Assurance Surve111ances, Revision 12, December 29, 1987
m
- - _ _ - _ _ _
_
,
'
.
.
..
.
Attachment A-
3
)
i
i
Instrument and Control (I&C) Department Procedure (DP) 0301,
Calibration and Control of Measuring ar.d Test Equipment (M/TE),
Revision 11, September 23, 1987
2.2 Test Procedures
>
Operations Procedure (0P) 4123 - Core Spray System
Surveillance, Revision 18,
February 27, 1989
OP 4334 - Automatic Initiation Test of PCIS Valves, Revision
j
11, March 23, 1989
OP 4368 - Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) System A/B
Isolution Logic Test, Revision 18, February 17, 1989
2. 3 Annual QA Audit Reports
I
VY-86-11 - Measuring and Test Equipment, September 19, 1986
VY-87-11 - M a suring and Test Equipment, June 11, 1987
{
VY-87-15 - Technical Specifications, July 29, 1987
VY-88-15 - Technical Specifications, March 11, 1988
VY-88-11 - Measuring and Test Equipment, September 16, 1988
2.4 QA Surveillance (SURVs)
SURV 88-0S - Core Spray System Surveillance, January 8, 1987
SURV 88-36 - Surveillance of Scram Discharge Instrument, Volume
High Water Functional Test, March 4, 1988
SURV 89-21 - Shutdown to Low Power Standy, February 11, 1989
SURV 89-22 - Reactor Core Isolation System Injection to Reactor
=
,
Vessel, February 13, 1989
!
SURV 89-24 - Battery Performance Test / Preventive Maintenance,
,
February 22, 1989
SURV 89-45 - Assembly of Reactor and Drywell System for
Operation, March 23, 1989
!
l
_ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ -