ML20214F503

Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.2.2, `Vendor Interface Programs (All Other Safety-Related Components),' Shearon Harris 1 & 2, Technical Evaluation Rept

ML20214F503
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	03/31/1987
From:	Udy A EG&G IDAHO, INC., IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
To:	NRC
Shared Package
ML18004B834	List: ML20214F503
References
CON-FIN-D-6002 EGG-NTA-7586, GL-83-28, TAC-64010, NUDOCS 8705260122
Download: ML20214F503 (14)

Text

__

l EGG-NTA-7586 <

Harch 1987 {

l INFORMAL REPORT idaho CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2--

1- National VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS: SHEARON HARRIS-1 AND -2 Engineering

' Laboratory ,

' Managed Alan C. Udy by the U.S.

Department ofEnergy s

1

)

(4 EEE"  ; Prepared for the wo,, ,,,,, ,, U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

' DOE Contract No. DE AC07-761D015?O .

m 14(f.

??05260t22 y

a . .

4 w

DISCLAIMER This book was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the Uruted States Govemment. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal hability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process dimosed, or represents that its use would not infnnge privately owned rignts. References herein to J.iy specific commercial oroduct, process, or service by trar') name, tracemark, manufacturer, or othemise, does not necessanly constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favonng by the United States Govemment or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessanly state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

9

EGG-NTA-7586 TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

~

CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2, VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS (ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS),

SHEARON HARRIS -1 AND -2 Docket Nos. 50-400/50-401 Alan C. Udy Published March 1987 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory EG&G Idaho, Inc.

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 1 Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570 l FIN No. 06002 I

4 A8STRACT This EG&G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from the Carolina Power and Light Company regarding conformance to Generic Letter 83-28, Item 2.2.2, for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.

l I

i 1

1 1

l 1 l Docket Nos. 50-400/50-401 TAC No. 64010 11

1 i

j FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating i 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 l

authorization B&R No. 20-19-40-41-3, FIN No. 06002.

i i

i I

j -

l Docket Nos. 50-400/50-401 TAC No. 64010 i ,

l iii .

l i

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

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

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 1

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

3. ITEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ................................. 3 3.1 Guideline .................................................. 3

3.2 Ev> uation ................................................. 3 3.3 Ccm.lusion ................................................. 4

4. PROGRAM WHERE VENDOR INTERFACE CANNOT PRACTICA8tY 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 l 5.1 Guideline .................................................. 7

, - 5.2 Evaluation ................................................. 7 5.3 Conclusion ................................................. 7 1

i

6. CONCLUSION ....................................................... 8 4

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

)

i i

l 1

4 4

4 iv r

i 3

1 4

_,.,_....m ,._.-__--m ,,,, , . - _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . _ , , _ , _ - -

. t i

CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 2.2.2.

j VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS (ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS).

SHEARON HARRIS -1 ANO -2 4

1. INTRODUCTION t

On February 25, 1983, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Sales Nuclear Power Plant failed to open upon an automatic reactor trip l

.. - 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 '

f 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 i

generator low-low level during plant startup. In this case, the reactor

{ was tripped manually by the operator almost coincidentally with the automatic trip.

1 l Following these incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC Executive Director for Operations (E00), directed the NRC staff to investigate and report on the generic implications of these occurrences at Unit 1 of the i Salem Nuclear Power Plant. The results of the staff's inquiry into the ,

f generic implications of the Salem unit incidents are reported in NUREG-1000, " Generic Implications of the ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear

' I Power Plant." As a result of this investigation, the Commission (NRC) f requested (by Generic Letter 83-28 dated luly 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 l analyses of these two ATWS events.

i 1

] This report is an evaluation of the responses submitted by the j .

Carolina Power and Light Company, the licensee for Unit Nos. I and 2 of the 1

l Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, for Item 2.2.2 of Generic

! Letter 83-28. The documents reviewed as a part of this evaluation are l listed in the references at the end of this report.

(

I l

1

)

l

2. REVIEW CONTENT AND FORMAT Item 2.2.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 requests the licensee or applicant I 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. ,

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.

J 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 l safety-related components and equipment are drawn.

}

i i

}

1 2

1 J

3. ITEM 2.2.2 - PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 3.1 Guideline f The licensee or applicant response should describe their program for l establishing 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 1 . or otherwise verified.

.i This program description should establish that such interfaces are established with their NSSS vendor, as well as with the vendors of key safety-related components such as diesel generators, electrical switchgear, auxiliary feedpumps, emergency core cooling system (ECCS) pumps, batteries, ,

battery chargers, and valve operators, to facilitate the exchange of current technical information. The description should verify that controlled procedures exist for handling this vendor technical information which ensure j that it is kept current and complete and that it is incorporated into plant J operating, maintenance and test procedures as is appropriate, t

3.2 Evaluation

The licensee for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant responded to these requirements with submittais dated November 7, 19832 and May 31, 1985. These submittals include information that describes their i 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 i

i supporting this program is available for audit upon request. We have reviewed this information and note the following.

The licensee's response states that they actively participate in the i Nuclear Utility Task Action Committee (NUTAC) program. The Vendor Equipment I Technical Information Program (VETIP) was developed by NUTAC. VETIP includes

)

I interaction with the NSSS vendor and with other electric utilities. Typical i

T I

3 l l

l l

- - _- .- . - - - _ . .. . -. _a

i NSSS vendor contact with the licensee involves Technical Bulletins provided by Westinghouse. This information, along with information provided by the

~

vendors of other safety-related equipment, is handled by the licensee in accordance with procedures that were, at the time of the licensee's submittals, being developed.

i The licensee describes an inventory program of technical manuals for

~

all safety-related equipment that seeks verification by the vendor that the licensee's manual is current and is the most up-to-date edition. As part ,

of the licensee's Operational Experience Feedback program, the licensee states that they will retain a continuing program of technical manual

. upgrade. The licensee describes how technical information obtained is

integrated into plant operating and maintenance instructions and procedures.

3.3 Conclusion We conclude that the licensee's response regarding program description  ;

is complete and, therefore, acceptable.

l l

i i

4 l

k R CT CA8LY BE ESTA8LISHED l-i 4.1 Guideline The licensee / applicant response should describe their program for f i, compensating for the lack of a formal vendor interface where such an 1 interface cannot be practicably established. This program may reference

, , the NUTAC/VETIP program, as described in INp0 84-010, issued in I

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 "

i Section~3.2 of the NUTAC/VETIP report. It should also be noted that the j lack of either a formal interface with each vendor of safety-related equipment or a program to periodically contact each vendor of-l safety-related equipment will not relieve the licensee / applicant of.his

responsibility to obtain appropriate vendor instructions and information j 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 i

In References 2 and 3, the licensee provided a brief description of

, the vendor interface program. Their description references the NUTAC/VETIP ,

j program. The licensee stated that plant instructions and procedures were i i being developed to assure that the VETIP program is properly controlled and implemented. j VETIP is comprised of two basic elements related to vendor equipment l.

problems; the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NpR05) and the  :

j. Significant Event Evaluation and Information Network (SEE-IN) programs. I l VETIP is designed to ensure that vendor equipment problems are recognized, ,

! evaluated and corrective action taken.

1 f

5 i

l

[ Through participation in the NPRDS program, the licensee submits l

engineering information, failure reports and operating histories for review 4

f under the SEE-IN program. Through the SEE-IN program, the Institute of

{ Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) reviews nuclear plant events that have been ,

j reported through the NPROS programs and Nuclear Network and NRC reports, j 8ased on the significance of the event, as determined by the screening review, INPO issues a report to all utt11ttes outlining the cause of the ,

l event, related problems and recommends practical corrective actions. These reports are issued in Significant Event Reports, in Significant Operating . ,

Experience Reports and as Operations and Maintenance Reminders. Upon j receipt of these documents, the licensee evaluates the information to j determine applicability to the fac111ty. This evaluation is documented and

. corrective actions are taken as determined necessary. ,

j .!

l The licensee's response stated that procedures were being developed to t i

r review and evaluate incoming equipment technical 1,1 formation and to incorporate it into existing procedures, i

j 4.3 Conclusion I F We find that the licensee's response to this concern is adequate and, therefore, acceptable.  !

i I

i i

1 l

t l .

1 .

l i

I I

I 6 l I

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 o applicable instructions for maintenance work on safety-related equipment are provided.

5.2 Evaluation The licensee, in Reference 3, committed to implement the NUTAC/VETIP program. They further state that they are in the process of developing a program to 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 i

7

6. CONCLUSION r  :

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 i

licensee to resolve the concerns of this program meet the requirements of l Generic Letter 83-28 and is acceptable.

I

.i .

i I

I l

4 1

9 1

l 4

J 8

i i

l

7. REFERENCES

1. Letter, NRC (0, 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)," luly 8, 1983. .

2. Letter, Carolina Power & Light Company (A. B. Cutter) to NRC '

(D. G. Eisenhut), " Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events,"

November 7, 1983, Serial LAP-83-516.

3. Letter, Carolina Power & Light Company (S. R. Zimmerman) to NRC l , (H. R. Denton), " Generic Letter 83-28, Request for Additional Information Responses," May 31, 1985, Serial NLS-85-186.

i i

I i

9

t

, . E,o..r wotts #.se p e ey Tsoc e vos ~e,,, e s as.C ,0.a8 338 u S. NUCL8Ai ASGubar0.T Consueese0as h,;? BIBUOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-NTA-7586 set i~st ucr!CNS og two .tyg.sg 3 Lt.V8 SLAN.

2. Y,rLE .~Q sve rar 68 CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEM 2.2.2--

VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY- ""C""'"'

RELATED COMPONENTS: SHEARON HARRIS-1 AND -2 oo~r- ....

l s . r-c. si March - 1987

. o ri...cor inuio Alan C. Udy oo~r. ....

l March 1987 ,

. ..oact ras. .o.. o~, r won.

,.. .o..,~oc a. .rio,~....~o...v~o.co.usu <.c ,

EG8G Idaho, Inc.

P. O. Box 1625 Idaho Falls, ID 83415 06002

, , e r... o, . ..o. r

,o o~ a..,o a.o.,,4.r,o, ~- i .~o ...m o .oo.u. ,, . < c ,

Division of PWR Licensing - A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

i. a covi.no" - - -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

,, ,e.... . .. , r . . . ,o r u

, t .u r . .e . . -

This EG8G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from the Carolina Power and Light Company regarding conformance to Generic Letter 83-28 Item 2.2.2, for Shearon Harris-1 and -2.

1

,........,,,r.

..acc oist.~. ..............:nc...ro..

stativ ~r ,

Unlimited Distribution 4 ,. neu..eV eL.n .. car,c= 1 I fn. e00 0 I

. ,eist.....s o,is ese n etaa Unclassified e.,.,,- j Unclassified i, won. o. ..cu l

\

. . .. c .

i l i

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