IR 05000219/1988027
| ML20207N894 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek, 05000000, Crane |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1988 |
| From: | Durr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Hukill H GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8810190449 | |
| Download: ML20207N894 (2) | |
Text
_ __ ___ _
'
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
OCT 141933 Docket Nos.
50-219 50-289 GPU Nuclear Corporation ATTN: Mr. H. O. Hukill Vice President and Director of TMI-1 P. O. Box 480 Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection Report Nos. 50-219/88-27, and 50-289/88-25 This letter refers to the routine inspection conducted by Mr. S. Chaudhary of l
this office on September 13 - 19, 1988, at the GPU Nuclear, Corporate l
Engineering Office in Parsippany, New Jersey. Mr. Chaudhary discussed the I
results of the inspection with Mr. G. Bond of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
This inspection focused on GPU corporate engineering support of the Oyster l
Creek and Three Mile Island facilities. Areas examined during this inspection are described in the NRC Region ! Inspection Report which is enclosed with this letter. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selected
examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with i
'
personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
Within the scope of this inspection, no violations were observed.
!
No reply to this letter is required.
Your cooperation with us in this matter t
is appreciated, j
Sincerely, i
Uf t cyno\\ e.ic)netl hy
'
L6 Ob6h Jacque P. Durr
'
Chief, Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety
[
Enclosure:
NRC Region I Inspection Report Nos. 50-219/88-27, and 50-289/88-25
9
d
I 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY OC/TMI1 DUP - 0001.0.0 t.sts15n1449 ssio14
- ca e, ora
- 65000119 10/04/88 (
r pdc TE E ' Cd
o
,
OCT 141939
.
-
.
.
GPU Nuclear Corp.
REGION I==
Report Nos.
50-219/88-27
'
5Ff8978F25
Docket No.
50-229 50-289 License No.
OPR-16 DPR-50 Licensee:
GPU Nuclear Corporation Parsippany, New Jersey
!
Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station - Unit 1
Inspection At: Parsippany, New Jersey i
Inspection Dates:
September 13 - 19, 1938 ew>
W
.._
M Inspectors:
S. Chauanary, 5enfor Reactor Engineer, MK date EB, DRS Region I
,
I*N M R. W. Winters, Reactor Engineer, ofpT, TeT cate DRS, Re ton !
Mrdt
Approved by:
/
'
Strosnider, Ch1Tf,~ Materials & Processes date
~
j ction, Engineering Branch, DRS, RI Inspection Summary: Routine unannounced inspection on September 13-19, 1988
{Keport Nos. W 219/88-27 and 50-289/88-25)
Areas Inspected: The inspection covered engineering support of the Oyster Creek and Three Mile Island Unit 1 operating plants by the corporate Technical Functions Organization Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
.
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-_
.
,
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted GPU Nuclear Corporation
<
.
- G. Bond, Director, Systems Engineering
- E. Wallace, Engineering Services Director
- A. Rone, Plant Engineering Director
- M. $anford, Component and Structures Director
- 0. Croneberger, Director. Engineering Projects
- D. Distel, FWR Licensing Engineer
- M. Laggart, BWR Licensing Engineer
G. Capodanno. Director, Engineering and Design
!
J. Flynn, Manager, Engineering Standards D. Shivas, Engineering Data Configuration Control Manager
>
- Denotes those attending the exit meeting.
The inspectors also contacted other administrative and technical
personnel during the inspection.
/
2.0 Objectives
<
j The objective of the inspection was to assess the adequacy of the licensee's program for engineering support to plant operations including
i design and configuration control, interfaces with other internal and external organizations, management support, staffing levels and
)
experience, training, and responses to NRC requirements and requests, i
3.0 Licensee Commitments The licensee's commitments and documents reviewed are listed in
Attachment 'A'
to this report.
i 4.0 Technical Functions Division - Overview
. Management Suppo_rt r
The inspectors observed that the licensee's engineering operations are grouped in a division called Technical Functions.
The division is headed by a Vice President.
Technical Functions is comprised of five departments, each headed by a director, with responsibilities to provide
,
technical support.
i l
The NRC documented in the previous SALP (Report 50-219/36-99) a number of
concerns regarding the engineering support provided to GPU's operating I
plants by the Technical Functions Division. In response to the NRC's
}
,
.
..
- _____ ___ __ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
.
-
-
.
.
.
i observations, the licensee initiated a program of self assessment to determine the cause and extent of the NRC's identified concerns, and to
-
evaluate, plan, and implement any corrective actions necessary. The licensee's self assessment confirmed that there are some programmatic inadequacies which required corrective action. Gased on the findings of l
the self assessment the licensee developed an action plan to correct the identified problems. Major objectives of this action plan are to (1)
'
improve response to engineering assistance requests from the plant and (2) better plan and control modification, design, and installation processes.
To accomplish these objectives, the licensee is emphasizing improved long
'
range planning and better problem definition and has reemphasized the use J
of formal planning tools and documentation to enhance the modification process.
With regard to configuration management of the plants, the licensee is
developing an overall GPUN Configuration Management Model that will J
document the current process for engineering configuration management (ECM) and implement a plan to improve the ECM program.
The licensee has budgeted for improving design basis documents, conducting safety system functional inspections, improving as-built
drawings to reflect plant conditions, and establishing a configuration
,
j management council to identify further improvements in the ECM program.
!
l The licensee strongly supports participation in industry, cwners groups, and professional societies. This was evident by the number of people
'
i representing GPUN on the owners and other industry groups, and financial
support to INPO. GPUN has funded an employee who was elected chairman of j
the B&W Owners Group.
l A scoring system has been established by Technical Functions Division to
assign priorities to tasks.
This scoring system is based on four j
categories with a point system within each category.
The categories are:
j regulations / requirements, safety, availability, and economics.
Those
tasks scoring highest are placed in the five year plan, i
i The inspectors noted that the licensee has an established program to trend and analyze generic technical information and plant parameters.
l These analyses and evaluations are documented in topical reports.
The j
inspectors reviewed a suple of topical reports and found them to be comprehensive, indepth analyses of the subject matters covered.
'
I In addition to the management reports generated by the Engineering Service Department, an interdepartmental management meeting is held
,
i biweekly.
This meeting is intended to discuss priorities, backlog, any
special problems, and to resolve any identified or potential problems j
within the departments.
!
j 5.0. Organization
. Details of the Review
!
'
---
- - - - -
.
. -. -. -. -.
_____ _ -___ _ _ __ _ ___ _____________ ____-__ _ -____-_- ______- -
._______
--__
__
.
.
.
l
.
.
i
!
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's current engineering organization
!
and held discussions with management personnel to determine the structure
'
and controls estabitshed in the department.
The procedural control of work in the engineering organization was
!
reviewed to assess the effectiveness of engineering procedures and
'
,
control of design interfaces. The procedures were reviewed for clarity
'
of requirements, and levels of authority and responsibility assigned to a
+
various groups and positions.
I i
The inspectors also reviewed selected work by different engineering
groups to assess the technical adequacy, completeness and complexity of
[
,
the engineering analysis, design, and evaluations.
Specific attention l
was paid to assess the quality of engineering output to support plant
"
operations, configuration control and enhancement of plant safety in
!
general.
i O_bservations j
Engineering Services:
--
,
i This Department is organized to provide support services, such as,
)
i drawing and document control, and computer programming for t
management controls, design and draf ting.
The department also
prepares and coordinates engineering and licensing procedures and
i standards and is responsible for planning and scheduling of
,
modifications and outage activities.
j Engineering and Design:
--
This Department is organized on the basis of classical engineering i
disciplines.
The Department prevides engineering and design i
services to the operating plants for modification, systems I
evaluation, regulatory requirements, and maintenance.
The i
assignments to this Department are channeled through the olant, or j
project engineering. When in-house engineering expertise or
,
j staffing is not available, the Director of this Department is
authorized to supplement the department resources by contracting to appropriate consultants.
The Department investigates plant system
and equipment failures and is responsible for the evaluation of the technical performance of plant hardware, and provides chemistry requirements to fossil and nuclear plants.
'
[
Systems Engineering:
--
j This Department is responsible for providing systems engineering i
support to the operating plants (0yster Creek, Three Mile Island -
!
,
J Unit 1).
The responsibilities include fuel enginearing, plant
[
systems performance, risk analysis, human factors tigineering, j
j radiological engineering, and plant dynamics and simulation.
-
I I
i
-
- - -
- - - - -
-
..
_ _ - _.
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _.
._
.
.
.
i
<
.
>
,
,
i i
This Department is responsible for maintaining software and software
configuration control for the training simulatcrs, staff, operations, and plant process computers.
It also evaluates safety significance and operating experience from NRC Notices and Bulletins
,
and other industry and professional reports and recommends appropriate action.
In addition, the Department provides Shif t Technical Advisors (STA)
.
to the operating plants to assure independent oversight and j
engineering perspective at the plants.
STAS independently report daily the plant status and their evaluations to the Director of the
'
Department.
Engineering Projects:
--
l The Department of Engineering Projects is assigned the
{
responsibility to manage and assure completion of physical plant j
modifications, additions, or major non-routine repairs; coordinate Technical Function Division personnel and activities on the plant
.
l sites; and provide approval and release of detailed engineering for
all Technical Functions sponsored projects.
In general, this
departmert functions as project engineers in organizing, planning, d
and coordinating all engineering efforts for projects for which GPUN l
performs the design engineering.
It also represents the licensee on i
the Babcock and Wilcox and EWR Onners Groups.
Startup and Test:
--
This Department is responsible for developing and maintaining test
'
plans, implementing procedures, test documentation, coordinating technical acceptance of testing; and providing testability inputs to l
Design Engineering for plant modifications.
)
To asses the adequacy, complexity and technical depth of the Technical j
Functions Division work the inspectors reviewed a sample of work from l
each department.
The documents were reviewed for procedural conformance,
depth and breath of technical analysis and validity of any
)
recommendations made, or conclusions derived from the analysis under consider. tion.
)
The inspectors also discussed the technical bases, analytical techniqu and the validity of the conclusions with cognizant engineers and managers.
!
)
The inspectors had extensive discussions with the Director of Engineering Services Department regarding records management and document control
'
I practices; upgrading end revising of drawings including, revision priorities, and any backlog of work in these areas.
!
Findings l
I
!
!
i
- ____ ___ _ _ _ - __-
_ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
___ _ _ _ _ _ - -
'
.
'
.
.
The inspectors determined that the Technical Functions Division is appropriately organized to provide adequate technical support to the operating plants.
This observation was based on the inspectors review of engineering analyses, Topical Reports, Technical Data Reports and Engineering Calculations, Licensing Action Item Reports, Trend and Performance Analysis Reports, and Cycle 12 Reload Design and Plant Safety Analysis.
6.0 Staffing _and Workload Details of the Review In conjunction with the review of the organization the inspectors examined the staffing and current workload in each department.
The results of examination for each department are as follows:
Engineering Services:
--
The Engineering Services Department has 28 professional employees with adequate administrative support staff.
The revision of drawings are prioritizec on the basis of their intended use.
There are four levels of priority assigned to various drawings.
Priority 1 is assigned to the drawings thst are necessary for plant opers?ional safety. A total of 300 drawings are assigned priority 1 for Oyster Creek.
Out of these 300 drawings, 180 drawings are maintained in the control room for operations.
The licensee informed the inspector that in the area of drawing update and revision, there were approximately 21 priority 1 (other than control room)
drawings awaiting revisions for Oyster Creek.
Fifteen of these drawings were overdue for revision in accordance with the licensee's procedural requirement of thirty day limit.
For Three Mile Island Unit I there was essentially no drawings overdue.
The inspectors observed that the department was heavily involved in developing the long range plans of the Technical Functions Division for the operating plants to increase the effectiveness of resources, and outage and modification planning.
The objective of the long range plan is to enhance plant safety and operability.
The effectiveness of this long range planning was evidenced by the TMI-7R outage being completed four days ahead of schedule.
Also for Oyster Creek, the 12R outage engineering was essentially complete prior to the start of the outage.
This was in sharp contrast with the licensee's previous practice of engineering modifications while the work progressed during outages.
The computer assisted records and information retrieval system (CARIRS) is a corporate record management system.
It has many databases used by various corporate entities. The Technical Functions Division of GPUN controls and m41ntains six databases
__
_ - _
_ _ _ _ -_-____.
__. _ _ _ _
. - _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _.
.
,
'
.
<
.
applicable to the two opere ':q.iuclear facilities. These six databases are:
one database for each plant designated an active database
--
containing the indices of currently applicable documents.
one database for each plant is designated archival which
--
contains indices of superseded and historical information.
one database is maintained for each plant simulator.
--
The input to these databases is controlled by the Engineering Services group of the Technical Functions Division. The output of the CARIRS system is available throughout the corporation on an authorized access basis. The access is also controlled by the Engineering Services Department.
The inspectors observed that the inputs to the database is designed to provide information regarding the authenticity, status, and availability of selected documents and the cross references documents af fecting the subject entry.
This system is also used in the configuration control of the plants, and establishing design bases of equipment and plant systems.
In addition, engineering uses the system as a data base to retrieve information for use in modifications, design and other engineering analysis and evaluations, Actions have also been initiated to improve the computer assisted records and information retrieval system (CARIRS) utilization.
The effectiveness of the CARIRS system in accomplishing its intended function to provide current document status was diminished due to the licensee's present practice of creating a "Roll Over Design Change Notice (R00CN)" to tabulate all change documents in one master package.
The creation, review, audit and approval of the RODCN rnay take anywhere from a few weeks to several months depending upon the size, complexity, and schedule of the completion of the modification.
The inspectors noted that the CARIRS system inputs had a lag of one to three days after receipt of the approved documents by the Record Management Group. However, the delay due to the review and approval cycle of the ROOCN creates an apparent backlog in document status input. This apparent inconsistency creates a user perception of the inaccuracy, especially in the plants, that the CARIRS system is inaccurate.
Engineering and Design:
--
,The Engineering and Design Department is authorized 150 positions.
Currently th..e are 137 positions filled of which 99 are technical and professional personnel.
Included in the above staff, forty are assigned to functions supporting both nuclear and fossil fueled facilities.
These functions include metallurgical and chemistry
_ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
__
.
.
-
laboratories and services. The balance of the staff is dedicated to
~
engineering services for the operating nuclear plants.
The inspectors held discussions with the Director of the department and responsible engineers, and reviewed the departmental work load and a selected sample of engineering analyses performed by the department.
The Director informed the inspectors that there were approximately 250 projects assigneo to the department. These projects are of various sizes and complexity.
They include both short and long term projects, and are at various stages of completion. A high priority has been assigned to projects that are necessary to support to 12R outage of Oyster Creek scheduled for October, 1988. The priorities established for each task are reviewed quarterly by department managers. Any change in the target dates or priority level of key projects requires approval of the department managers concerned i.e. no one department manager has authority to untiaterally ch'.nge the target date or priority of a task which impacts other departments or the operating plants.
The Engineering and Design Department is essentially an in-house engineering service organization that receives assignments from other departments within the Technical Functions Division and provides design services to those groups. The work within the department is controlled by formal engineering procedures and well documented.
The output of this department consists of design packages for modifications, system and equipment performance analysis, and assorted engineering evaluations on an as needed basis.
The department uses engineering consultants to supplement the in-house capabilities.
The Director of the department is authorized to retain consultants when necessary without prior approval within his departmental budget.
For more complex and long term consultant services the approval is required on a case by case basis.
Currently, the department has retainer contracts with the nuclear steam system supplier and one major architect engineering organization.
The inspectors reviewed the use and control of computers during design and analysis. The majority of the computer programs used by the department are commercially available, benchmarked programs used throughout the industry.
Any specific program designed and developed in-house is reviewed, verified by simp 1tfied hand calculations, and approved prior to use.
The department procedures require that the design calculations and assumptions be checked and verified by independent qualified personnel.
The department policy also requires that design engineers familiarize themselves with the physical layout and installation of the system by direct observations prior to the start of the design process.
This policy has been initiated to minimize
___
.
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. __. _ _ _ _ _ _
-_
_
__
-. _____
'
j
.
j
-
.
!
I change requests by assuring that the design will not interfere with
!
existing conditions in the plant. This policy also assures that the as installed condition of the plants systems are identified and
documented for inclusion into the plant configuration control program,
]
Systems Engineering:
--
The Systems Engineering Department is authorized 103 positions.
- '
Currently there are 92 positions filled of these 77 are technical and professional personnel, which include 13 Shif t Technical Advisors and the rest are administrative support staff, j
An independent technical overview function of plant operational
safety, and fuel engineering is the primary responsibility of this department.
The department also staffs, operates, programs and i
j upgrades plant process computers, and maintains and controls the j
plant training simulators.
l
The inspectors reviewed sample outputs of the department's work; i
training and qualification procedures for Shift Technical Advisors;
documents related to plant performance, transient analysis, trending i
and operating experience, and fuel engineering reports.
This
department's responsibility is oriented towards plant operability
and safety.
The department supports plant operations by monitoring j
plant status, operability, and safety and by independent transient
analysis through the Shift Technical Advisors.
.I i
The inspectors observed that the department has an established j
program to monitor and analyze safety significant operating l
experiences from external sources, i.e, NRC Notices and Bulletins,
INPO Data Base and other industry reports.
This program is designed i
to provide recommendations in appropriate cases to enhance the f
safety and reliability of the operating plants, i
The inspectors reviewed three reports (TDR-850. TDR-886 and The i
Event Trending and Operating Experience Review Prograt Reports for l
TMI-1 and OC) to determine the scope and technical adequacy, depth j
of the analysis, methods of evaluation and the validity of the
!
conclusions reached in the reports.
The reports indicated an i
indepth analysis and evaluation of the covered subjects.
The technical content of the reports was of high quality. There were
,
j extensive backup data included in the reports in the form of graphs
!
and tables to support the conclusions. As an example, in TDR No, I
886, TMI-1 Specific ATWS Analysis, The ATWS rule 10 CFR 50.62, that I
requires B&W plants to provide Diverse Scram Systems (055) and l
. Mitigation Systems to reduce risk from ATVS was analyzed.
This TDR evaluates the peak pressure resulting from a loss of main feedwater
j event and to develop the set point for the DSS.
For this analysis, a THI-1 RELAP5 model was developed and benchmarked against a loss of j
main feedwater ATVS analysis perforced by B&W using sinilar generic l
,
-
'
.
.
assumptions. Specific values for moderator and doopler coefficients, emergency feedwater setpoints and flow, and feedwater coastdown were incorporated to assure the analysis specifically modeled the TMI-1 operating characteristics.
This department has developed in-house capabilities for fuel management and engineering for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, and currently is in the process of developing similar capabilities for Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station - Unit 1.
This is a good initiative on the part of the licensee to reduce dependence on outside contractors. A fully developed capability in this area will provide consistent analysis and overview by personnel dedicated to specific plants.
Another example of the groups effective monitoring of the plant operations was evident by the awareness in the group of the heat exchanger biofouling problems before the plant requested any assistance with this problem.
Engineering Projects:
--
The Engineering Projects Department is authorized 63 positions.
Currently there are 61 positions filled, of these 52 are technical and professional personnel.
The inspectors dise.ussed policies, practices, and the responsibilities of this department with the department Director to assess the departments involvement with the engineering and technical support provided to the operating plants. The interface of this department with other engineering support groups was evaluated by review of procedures and department policies.
Through these discussions and the review of documented policies and procedures, the inspectors noted that this department primarily is responsible for providing project management services for all major modifications and also some minor modifications that are classified Capital Projects.
In summary, the department provides management of modifications and engineering liaison with the plants from the conceptual stage to the final implementation of the modifications in the operating plants.
Startup and Test:
--
The functions of this department were not reviewed during this inspection.
Conclusions The inspectors determined the follewing:
Engineering Services
--
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -
_ _ _ _
.
.
.
.
)
.
.
l
j The Engineering Services Department is appropriately organized and
~
staffed to support the Technical Functions Division responsibilities.
The procedure control is exercised by the Procedures and Standards i
Group within this department.
The design and drafting groups c 'ectiveness was also evidenced by the lack of substantial backlog i, drawing updates for Oyster Creek, and essentially no backlog for j
Three Mile Island, Unit 1.
The engineering service department is the focal point for assembling, analyzing, and generating the management information reports on a regular schedule. These reports provide higher management with an
overview of the Divisional operations.
The reports are used to
formulate divisional long range plans, budgetary forecasts, workload distribution, and identify reas requiring management attention.
The
inspectors reviewed a sample oi these reports and found no deficiencies
in the information content, methods of presentation, and their g
distribution.
t j
Engineering and Design
--
,
j The inspectors determined that the current 4taffing of this
departtent is adequate to perform assigned functions.
The work backlog as defined by the department Director appeared to be at an acceptable level.
)
Systems Engineering
--
'
The Systems Engineering Department is appropriately organized and staffed to support the departments responsibilities.
The strength I
of the department is in operational support and analyses required by i
the plants.
The department's oversis.it responsibility is enhanced
'
by the plant STA's reporting to this organization.
l Engineering projects
--
!
The staffing in this department appeared to be sufficient to
!
effectively perform the departmental responsibilities.
}
The inspectors determined that this department essentially provides
'
the project management services for modifications and other
miscellaneous construction to the plants.
The department's function is to provide liaison among design engineering, f acilities construction, plant operations, and engineering consultants, if any, d
I during the design and installation of modifications.
Project
!
controls, such a % budget, schedule, and manpower are also under the
]
purview of this department.
'
l
l
~
-
. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_
c
-
.
~4 t:
7.0 Training The licensee's training department provides training and instructional facilities on a company wide basis.
The individual divisisns and departments are responsible for identifying their training needs.
The Technical Functions Division uses the training department's facilities and expertise in providing training to division personnel.
The inspector determined that the division had established a comprehensive training program for entry level ergineers.
The Shift Technical Advisor Training also was provided by the training department.
The inspectors noted that although the STAS are part of the Technical Functions and administratively report to the Director of Systems Engineering who establishes their training and certification requirements, the Training Department procedure for STAS was neither approved by, concurred with, nor distributed to the Systems Engineering Department.
The Director of System Eng'neering Gepartment did not have a controlled
copy of tir s procedure in,as files.
8.0 Communications No major deficiencies in the organization, staffing, qualifications, and training of the Technical Functions Division were observed and the Division appears capable of providing effective technical support to the operating
- ,l a n t s.
The NRC in previous inspection and SALP reports had identified problems in engineering support to the plants.
The licensee s self assessment also identified a concern regarding lack of communications between the plant operations and the Technical Function Division personnel.
It appears that conaunication between the Technical Function Division and the plarts may be an area needing improvement.
The licensee has implemented several steps, such as, requiring Project and Responsible Discipline Engineers to walkdown systens and enhance communication with their counter-parts on the operations staff.
The above actions are good initiatives toward improving communications and information transfer between the two
.
organizations.
9.0 Management Meetings
_
Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at the entrance interview on September 13, 1988.
The findings of the inspection were discussed with licensee representatives during the
,
course of the inspection and presented to licensee management at the l
September 19, 1988 exit interview (see paragraph I for attendees).
At no time during the inspection was writter material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
The licensee did not indicate that proprietary information was involved within the scope of this inspection, l
I
.
.
i ATTACHMENT A DOCUMENTS REVIEWE0 Administrative Procedures 1000-1-7350.01 (EMP-19), Revision 6, Plant Modifications Engineered by Plant Eng w ering 5000-ADM-2131.01 (TAP-004), Revision 2-00, Technical Functions Personnel Indoctrination and Training 5000-ADM-2600.01 (EP-015), Revision 2-00, Training Material and Program Review 5000-ADM-2620.01 (TAP-005), Revision 2-00, Shift Technical Advisor Selection and Training 5000-ADM-7311.01 (EP-006), Revision 2-02, Calculations 5000-ADM-7311.02 (EP-009), Revision 3-00, Design Verification 5000-ADM-7350.05 (EMP-002), Revision 1-00, Mint-Mods Policy Drocedures 5000-POL-1218.02 (P0-002), Revision 1-00, Operational Flow Charts Training Procedures 7850-PGD-2721, Revision 4, Shift Technical Advisor Training Program Technical Data Reports TDR-405, Revision 0, TMI-1: Evaluation of Plant Radiation Release and its 10 CFR 50, Appendix I Conformance for Different Operating Conditions TOR-NG-850, May 14, 1987, Technical Basis for HSPS/ICG Low Level Limit Set Point for TMI-1 TOR-856, August 15, 1988, Event Trending and Operating Experience Review Program for TM1-1 an OC TOR-919, Revision 0, Evaluation of TMI-1 Rated Power St, etch to 25'8 MWt Calculation Sheet C-1302-226-5411-158, Revision 0, Cycle 11 Rod Sequence Extension U
C-1302-226-5411-162, Revision 1. Mid-Cycle Criticals at 200 F Topical Reports t -
_,. _ __
_ _ _ _ _.
.
ATTACHMENT A
P
.
TR-020-A, Revision 0, Methods of Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors Water Lattice Physics TR-021-A, Revision 0, Methods of Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors Steady State Physics TR-033-A, Revision 0, Methods of Generation of Core Kinetics Data for RETRAN-02 TR-040-A, Revision 0, Steady-State and Quasi-Steady-State Methods Used in the Analysis of Accidents and Transients TR-045, Recision 0, BWR Transient Analysis Model Using the PETRAN Code TR-049, Revision 0, Reload Information and Safety Analysis Report for OC Cycle 12 Reload Trend and Performance Analysis Report TPAR-TMll-06-20, Thermal Performance and Availability Report - June 1988 TPAR-TMIl-06-21, TMI-1 System and Equipment Operating Trend Summary Report, March 1987 - June 1988 TPAR-TMll-06-22, TMI-1 Availability Summary Cycle 6 Safety Evaluation SE-000650-001, Revision 1, Use of NAS Calculations and Displays for Compliance with Core Related TMI-1 Technical Specifications SE-135400-005, Revision 0, Cycle 7 Reload Design Other Documents DC-CPR-C11-V16, OC Core Performance Report for June 1988 TMI-CPR-C6-V16, TMI-1 Core Performance Report for June 1988 V-1302-226-087, Revision 0, Verification Plan / Status Sheet A Comparison of RPS Performance Between Oyster Creek and the Rest of the BWR Industry Computer Applications Simulator - Monthly Task Status Report, August 10, 1988 Cycle 12 Core Reload Analysis Calculation Package for OC Memorandum, 5411-88-0033, February 11, 1988, Independent Review of Cycle 12 Reload Design and Safety Analysis (Reference Design)
.-.. -
.,
.
.. -
.
ATTACHMENT A
,
.
Memorandum, 5461-88-0041, August 10, 1988, Resolution of Action Items Resulting from 5/19/88 Feedwater Transient Memorandum, Oyster Creek, 5462-88-077, July 19,1988, Effect of Removing One SW Pump on the RBCCW System Shift Technical Advisor Plant Status Sheet - OC, September 14, 1988 Shift Technical Advisor Plant Status Sheet - TMI Unit 1, September 14, 1988
.
__
. _ _
y