IR 05000244/1988010
| ML17251A225 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 07/28/1988 |
| From: | Eapen P, Prividy L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17251A223 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-88-10-EC, NUDOCS 8808150224 | |
| Download: ML17251A225 (6) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-244/88-10 Docket No.
50-244 License No.
DPR-18 Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Cor oration 49 East Avenue Rochester New York 14649 Facility Name:
R.
E. Ginna Meeting At:
Re ion I Office Kin of Prussia Penns lvania Meeting Conducted:
June
1988 Prepared by:
. /
L. J.
P ividy, Reactor Engineer, DRS date
~
~
Approved by:
P.
K. Eapen, Chief, Special Test Programs Section 7/(.p/gg'ate Office on June 24, 1988, to discuss the findings of NRC Region I Inspection Report No. 50-244/88-10.
This meeting was attended by NRC and licensee management.
The licensee presented background and supplemental information relating to the apparent violations identified in Inspection Report No.
50-244/88-10.
A copy of the licensee's viewgraphs used at the meeting are attached to this report.
a~p8p2
R AOOCK PHV pagsp224 gppp24<
pDR
~ g -->>e
'
'0 e
(
e
~
(
~
ee I
~
e;e e
~>>
- ~
eee>>ee>>ee".
ee; e
~ =
~ ~
e )
- (
I -e>>e>>
((7,-
e (f e~"]
e e,
DETAILS Meetin Attendees C. Anderson - Manager, Quality Assurance R. Smith - Chief Engineer B.
Snow - Superintendent, Nuclear Production S. Spector - Superintendent, Ginna Production P. Wilkens - Nuclear Engineering Manager G. Wrobel - Senior Engineer, Nuclear Engineering US Nuclear Re viator Commission L. Bettenhausen
- Chief, Projects Branch No.
1, ORP J. Durr Chief, Engineering Branch, DRS P.
K.
Eapen - Chief, Special Test Programs Section, DRS H. Gregg - Senior Reactor Engineer, ORS J. Gutierrez - Region I Attorney W. Johnston - Acting Director, Division of Reactor Safety L. Harsh - Chief, Mechanical Engineering Branch, NRR L. Prividy Reactor Engineer, DRS E. Sullivan - Chief, Inservice Testing Assessment Section, NRR J.
Trapp - Reactor Engineer, DRS J. Wechselberger Acting Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1A, DRP Introduction Following the introduction of all personnel attending the conference, the NRC presented a brief discussion of the concerns with the licensee's Inservice Testing (IST) Program, especially those related to check valves.
The purpose of the meeting was stated and the apparent violations were identified.
The licensee's views of the apparent violations identified in Inspection Report No. 50-244/88-10 were also requested.
Licensee Presentation The licensee's response consisted of a presentation of several topics pertinent to the IST Program concerns as follows:
(1) IST Program background; (2) root cause analysis of check valve concerns; (3) impact on the FSAR accident analyses; and, (4)
a short and long term action plan to prevent recurrence.
An agenda and viewgraph presentation of these topics were provided by the licensee and are attached to this report.
The licensee information included an organization chart of those personnel who are involved in the IST Program corrective action activities.
In this regard, the licensee noted that their long range plan is to shift control of the IST Program from the QA Manager to the Mechanical Engineering Manage In discussing the various topics, several pertinent points were discussed which will impact subsequent actions.
A recent letter from NRR to the licensee presented a series of questions concerning the Ginna IST Program.
These questions were the result of the NRC's detailed review of the IST Program prior to the formulation of a third 10-year IST program.
The licensee is currently reviewing these questions and will factor the results into an overall action plan concerning the IST Program.
As this occurs, adjustments may be necessary to the Short and Long Term Action Plan presented during the meeting.
While it appeared that the licensee has focused planning and resource efforts to formulate corrective actions, another point of considerable discussion during the meeting addressed the licensee's lack of in-depth evaluation of the safety significance of each of the findings of Inspection Report 50-244/88-10 relative to the plant accident analyses.
The licensee was not able to demonstrate conclusively that they had been operating the plant within its design bases for those systems where check valve concerns had been identified.
4.
Conclusion The meeting concluded with a summary discussion by Region I management uhere the licensee was informed that appropriate enforcement action would be the subject of future correspondence.