IR 05000245/1986025
| ML20207G707 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 12/24/1986 |
| From: | Eapen P, Winters R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207G671 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-86-25, 50-336-86-30, 50-423-86-37, NUDOCS 8701070380 | |
| Download: ML20207G707 (4) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
..
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report Nos.
50-245/86-25 50-336/86-30 50-423/86-37 Docket Nos.
50-245, 50-336, 50-423 License Nos.
DPR-21, OPR-65, NFP-49 Licensee:
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Facility Name:
Millstone Units 1, 2, and 3 x
Inspection At: Berlin, Connecticut Inspection Dates: December 1 - 5, 1986 Inspector:
it, 22 R. W. Winters, Reactor Engineer date Approved by:
3*/2'1 "
/2/74/86 p Dr. P. K. Eapen,' Chief, Quality Assurance dat'e Section, Operations Branch, DRS, RI Inspection Summary: Routine unannounced inspection on December 1 - 5, 1986 (Report Nos. 50-245/86-25, 50-336/86-30, and 50-423/86-37)-
Areas Inspected: Offsite review committees (Nuclear Review Boards) activities Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
8701070390 861224 PDR ADOCK 05000245 Q
FDR _
A
_ _..
.
k DETAILS 1.0 Fersons Contacted W. D. Becker, Supervisor, Electrical Engineering - Millstone Unit 1,
Nuclear Review Board member
- M. V. Bonaca, System Manager, Reactor Engineering - Millstone Unit 3, Nuclear Review Board, Chairman J. F. Ely, Supervisor, Component Engineering - Millstone Unit 1, Nuclear Review Board member
- D. A. Hitchcock, Engineering Technician - Secretary, Millstone 1 and 2, Nuclear Review Board
- M. P. Hornyak, Operations Quality Assurance Specialist
- R. T. Laudenat, Manager, Generation Facilities Licensing, - Millstone Unit 2, Nuclear Review Board, Chairman
- J. L. Majewski, Engineer, Licensing, - Secretary, Millstone Unit 3, Nuclear Review Board E. J. Mroczka, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Operations D. O. Nordquist, Manager Quality Assurance
- R. A. Place, Millstone Unit 1, Nuclear Review Board, Vice Chairman
- denotes those attending the exit meeting Other engineering, management, QA/QC and technical personnel were interviewed during the course of this inspection.
2.0 Offsite Review Committees (Nuclear Review Boards)
2.1 Program Review
~
Procedures NEO 2.02, Charter for Nuclear Review Boards, Revision 2 and NEO 3.01, Conduct and Format of Nuclear Review Board Audits, Revision 1.A were reviewed to determine whether administrative controls clearly describe the following:
--
Independent review and audit authority and responsibility
--
Manner by which Technical Specification Section 6 reviews and audits will be accomplished Meeting frequency, maintenance and distribution of minutes and
--
records Lines of communication and interface with other groups such as
--
the onsite review committee.
.
,-
_
.__
-
.
.
2.2 Implementation and Organization The Nuclear Review Boards (NRB) for each of the Millstone Units 1, 2, and 3 are composed of eleven members appointed by the Senior Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Operations.
Items and subjects reviewed by the NRB included onsite safety review committee meeting minutes, modification packages, proposed license amendments, board follow up items, audit reports and the status of plant operations.
Millstone Unit 1 - NRB The Millstone Unit 1 NRB has held nine meetings during 1986.
Attendance was consistently above the quorum required by the Technical Specifications.
In many cases guest speakers and experts were present to present technical and quality assurance related issues.
The operations QA specialist was a frequent speaker at meetings.
From a review of the Items Carried Forward (ICF) list the inspector determined action was normally completed within 2 or 3 meetings.
In some cases items were referred to other organizations to follow when such action was appropriate to use existing organizations e.g.
questions on design changes were referred to the design organizations.
Millstone Unit 2 - NRB The Millstone Unit 2 NRB has held 15 meetings during 1986.
Attendance at these meetings was also consistently above the quorum required by the Technical Specifications. The inspector determined from a review of the ICF list that this committee was equally as active as the Unit I committee.
Millstone Unit 3 - NRB
$
j The Millstone Unit 3 NRB has held 11 meetings during 1986.
Attendance at these meetings was also consistently above that required by the Technical Specifications. A review of the ICF i
list revealed that at the time of this inspection there were i
[
16 open items on the list. One of these items involved a
'
study of work items at all four units (3 Millstone units and
.
Haddem Neck plant) to assure that the support staff would not be overloaded by individual demands. Measures will also be a
l established to provide support for significant tasks such as
!
those required by refueling or unplanned outages.
.
k
I
.
\\
-
.
'
2.3 Audits NRB audits, except those of QA, required by the Technical Specifications are conducted by the Quality Assurance department.
The inspector reviewed selected audit reports, audit checklists and auditor qualifications. The lead auditor was certified in accordance with ANSI N45.2.23 and other specialist auditors had been given an indoctrination in audits conducted for the NRB. No significant deficiencies were identified by the above audits reviewed.
2.4 Conclusions No deviations or violations were identified. The NRBs were functioning with respect to their charter as described in the Technical Specifications and in ancordance with the applicable procedures. The NRB Chairmen and r.: embers interviewed demonstrated a familiarity with the subjects cove.ed in the meeting minutes and with the objectives of the Boards.
L:censee philosophy is that an individual's acceptance of membership an the committee should be a serious commitment. Therefore there are no alternate members on these committees.
From the review of meeting attendance it does not appear that the licensee has trouble in meeting quorum requirements. This is an indication the above licensee philosophy is effective. A conservative approach has been established by the licensee since complete modification packages are reviewed by the committees rather than only safety evaluations as required by the Technical Specifications prior to declaring the modified system or component operational.
3.0 Management Meetings
,
Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at the entrance interview on December 1, 1986. The findings of the inspection were discussed with licensee representatives during the course of the inspection and presented to licensee management at the December 5, 1986 exit interview (see paragraph 1 for attendees).
At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector. The licensee did not indicate that proprietary information was involved within the scope of this inspection.
..,,
-
e
-,-w
- - - -