IR 05000255/1991020

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Enforcement Conference Rept 50-255/91-20 on 911009. Notification of Enforcement Action Will Be Transmitted by Separate Correspondence
ML18057B332
Person / Time
Site: Palisades Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 10/18/1991
From: Greenman E
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Slade G
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
Shared Package
ML18057B333 List:
References
EA-91-126, NUDOCS 9110280050
Download: ML18057B332 (23)
v • d • e


Text

i,_)'*:

. *~*

Docket.No. 50-255 License No. DPR-20 EA 91-126

.

Ctinsum~rs Power Company ATTN:

Gerald General Manager Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043

Dear Mr. Slade:

r, f"1** 1 r

"(.,'"

~..,;

'"'

J""'~I This refers to an Enforcement Conference conducted by Dr. Carl J. Paperiello;.

Deputy Regiona.1 Administrator, and other members of the Region III staff on October 9, 1991, of attivities at your Palisades Nu~lear Generating plant, authorized by NRC License No. DPR-20 and to the discussion of our findings*

with you and your staff.

We have enclosed a report summarizing the discussion.

You will be notified by separate correspondence of our decision regarding the Enforcement Action based on the information presented. and discussed at the Enforcement Conference.

No response is req~ired until you are notified of the proposed Enforcement Action.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and enclosed enforcement conference report will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

We will gladly dis~uss*any questions.you have conterning this Enforcement Conference.

Enclosure:

Enforcement Conference Report Ne. 50-255/91020(DRP)

See.Attached Distribution RIIl RIJI Schweibinz/dp Jorgensen 9110280050 911018 PDR ADOCK 05000~55 Q

PD!<

Sincerely, Edward G. Greenman, Director Division of R~actor Projects

,,...,,: P-e de rs on

. /

.' -;

  • e Consumers Power Company Distribution

REGION Ill 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 601*37 Docket No. 50-255 license No. DPR-20

. EA 91-126 Consumers Power Company ATTN:

Gerald General Manager Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043

Dear Mr. Slade:

( (I'

]

  • ..

'

.. / v j. ~ v

  • .;..,~1 i This refers to an Enforcement Conference conducted by Dr. Carl J. Paperie*llo,.

Deputy Regional Administrator, and other members of the Region III staff on October 9, 1991, of activities at your Palisades Nuclear Generating plant, authorized by NRC license No. DPR-20 and to the discussion of -our findings.

with you and your staff.

We have enclosed a report s~mmarizing the discussi6n.

You will be notified by separate correspondence *rif our decision regarding the.

Enforcement Action based on the information presented ahd discus~ed at the Enforcement.Conference.

No response is required until you are notified of the proposed Enforcement Action.

  • In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and enclosed enforcement conference report will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this Enforcement Conference..

Enclosure:

Enforcement Conference Report No. 50-255/91C20(DRP)

See Attached Distribution

Sincerely, w~~AU~

J.... Edward G. ~-O~i*~t~

D' Division of*Reactor Projects

  • Consumers Power Company Distribution cc w/enclosure:

David P. Hoffman, Vice President Nuclear Operation~

P. M. Donnelly, Safety and Licensing Director

. DCD/DCB (RIDS)

OC/LFDCB Resident Inspector, Rill James R. Padgett, Michigan Public Service Commission Michigan Department of Public Health Palisades, LPM, NRR SRI, Big Rock Point OCT 1 ::, 1... _.

W~* I

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGiON III Report No. 50-255/91020 Docket No. 50-255 Licens~ No. DPR-20 Licensee:

Consumers Power Company 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043 Meeting Conducted:

October 9, 1991 Meeting At:

Region III Offic~, Glen Ellyn, Illinois

. Type of Meeting:

.. Enforcement Conference r*,-

/}. t,' /

,,

U-<-u..:-r~)-...( :.

..J,.v~'-*'-*-::: £',_-.*~~

E. R. * Schweibinz

-::I Inspector:

Senior Project Engineer J. R. Roton, Resident Inspecto~

F. 0. I /*

  • L!.'.

Reviewed By:.. O:. ':j-(t-c.~~'.,__~'-;

l-f'-,~ B. L. Jorgensen,dhief t

Reactor Projects Sec ion 2A

/(;!/*(/

Date I!..: * r / * l /

Date Date'

'

'

Enforcement Conference on October 9, 1991,(Report No. 50-255/91020(DRP))

Areas Discussed: A review of the apparent v1olat1o~s and areas ot concern identified d~ring the inspection (documented in Report Ho. 50-255/91017), and corrective actions taken or planned by the licensee. The enforcement options pertainin~ to the apparent violations were also discussed with the licensee.

9110280058 ~11018 PDR ADOCV 05000255

F'Di:

  • DETAILS 1.

Persons Present at Conference Consumers Power Company D. P. Hoffman, Vice President, Nuclear G. B. Slade, Plant General Manager P. M. Donnelly, Plant Safety and Licensing Director R. J. Gerling, Safety Analysis Su.pervisor M. J; K~ne, OPS Plant Shift Supervisor M. T. Nordin, Electrical Systems Engineering Section Head C. T. Hillman, Senior Engineer, Licensing Department J. L. Kuemin, Licensing Administrator D. J. Malone, Shift Engineer R. M. Rice, Superintendent - Production T. C. Duffy, Licensing Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III C. J. Paperiello, Deputy Regional Administrator, RIII E. G. Greenman, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Riil B. Clayton, Chief, Reactor Projects Bra~ch 2, Rill

C. D. Pederson, Enforcement Director, RIII B. L. Jorgensen, Chief, Reactor Projects Sec~ion 2A, RIII E. R. Schweibinz, Senior Project Engineer, RIII J. R. Roton, Resident Inspector, Palisades

C. H. Weil, Enforcement Specialist, RIII

~-

M. Troskoski, Enforcement Specialist, OE J. K. Heller, Senior Resident Inspector, Palisades B. E. Holian, Palisades Project Manager, NRR B. A. Berson, Regional Counsel, RIII D. S. Butler, Reactor Inspector, RIII R. L. Bywater, Reactor Engineer, RIII C. E. Brown,.Reactor Engineer; RIII J. A. Lennartz, Reactor Engineer (Examiner), Riil M. K. Khar1na, Reactor Engineer (Intern), RIII

  • .D. E: Roth, Reactor Engineer (Intern), RIII J. F. Harold, Reactor Engineer (Intern), RIII S. Sanders, Reactor Engineer (Intern), Riil 2.

Enforcement Conference An enforcement conference was held in the NRC Region III officE on October 9, 1991.

Th~s conference ~as conduct~d as a result of the prEl~minary findings of the inspectibn conduct~d on September 10 through 20, 1991, in which apparent violations of NRC regu_lations and license conditions were identified.

Inspection findings are documented in Inspectior Report No. 50-255/910i7, transmitted to the li~ensee by letter dated October 1, 1991.

  • The purpose of this conference was tp (1) discuss the apparent vio12tions, cau~es, and the licensee's corrective actions; (2) discuss

. several* areas of concern;* (3) determine if there were any escalating or mitigating circumstances; and (4) obtain any information which would help determine the appropriate enforcement action.

The licensee's representatives. did contest part of the apparent violation~,

but were in agreement with the NRC's understanding rif the areas of concern.

The licensee stated that the operability of containment spray pump P-54C was indeterminate from the tiine it was last tested on February 11, 1991, until it failed its test on May 23, 1991.

The NRC stated that the spray pump was inoperable during this period. The NRC position is that a safety system component is either operable or inoperable at all times.

Indeterminate*

is not a recognized state of operab i 1 ity. *

Regarding Inspection Report 50-255/91017(DRP), the licensee stated that further review indicated that pump P-548 was rendered inoperable after it was started for system air sweeps and thus it also was not verified operable prior to the reactor being taken critical on March 10, 1991, contrary to what is indicated. in the second paragraph (03/03/91) on page 4 of the inspection report.

The licensee indicated that an administrative procedure, Standing Order No. 54, required the containment spray pumps to be operable when the plant exceeds 325°F, in addition to when the reactor is taken critical and thus they were administratively required to be operable on March 25 and 26, 1991, contrary to what is indicated in the fourth paragraph (03/25/91), sixth paragraph (03/26/91), and eighth paragraph (05/23/91) on page 4 of the i~spection report.

Fin~lly, the.

licensee also stated that in addition to the containment spray pumps not being verified operable, the startup procedure also failed to ~erify

    • operability of the high pressure safety injection (HPSI) pumps *at the proper point in time during the startup (this is also being corrected).

The licensee's. representatives described the events which led to the apparent violation~, including root causes and corrective actions taken.

In surr.mary, the corrective actions involved operator training, a revision.

. to the administrative testing program, a revision to the startup procedure,*

a preventative maintenance program on the breaker fuse block assembly, and providing indication for breaker closing coil power.

The licensee als0 addres.sed the safety significance of the containment.

spray pumps inoperability and provided a handout of its slides (attached).

  • At the conclusion of the meeting, the licensee was informed that it would be notified in the near future of the f i~el enforcement action.

Attachment:

As stated

<

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMP INOPERABILITY CONCERNS PRESENTED IN IR 91017 OCTOBER 9, 1991

.

j

ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMP.

I.

INTRODUCTION GBSlade II.

OVERVIEW

  • DGMalone Ill.

. POSSIBLE CAUSES DGMalone IV.

CORRECTIVE ACTION.

DGMalone *

V. * SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE TCDuffy/DGMalone VI.

INSPECTION REPORT COMMENTS

  • DGMalone VII. *CONCLUDING REMARKS GBSlade

_.*

.

.

FEBRUARY 11

,.

c MARCH 2 MARCH 3

.

MARCH, 10-MARCH 25

  • MARCH 26.

MAY 23

.

.

  • EVENT OVERVIEW SPRAY PUMPS TESTED WHILE SHUTDOWN. BREAKERS RACKED OUT AND FUSES REMOVED AT
  • CONCLUSION OF TEST.
  • BREAKERS RACKED IN, FUSES INSTALLED IN SPRAY PUMPS..

PCS TAKEN > 325°F (SPRAY PUMPS REQUIRED ADMINISTRATIVELY).

REACTOR TAKEN CRITICAL (SPRAY.

PUMPS REQUIRED BY TECH SPECS).

REACTOR TAKEN SUBCRITICAL REACTOR TAKEN CRITICAL -

FIRST TIME SINCE OUTAGE THAT QUARTERLY SPRAY PUMP SURVEILLANCE TEST IS PERFORMED.

SPRAY PUMP P""54C FAILED TO START.

PROBABLE_._CAUSE.

~

FUSE FINGERS NOT MADE UP

-

FUSE BLOCK IN GOOD CONDITION

..

. FUSE HOLDER IN GOOD CONDITION

-

FUSES IN GOOD CONDITION

-

FUSE HOLDER ORIENTATION CHECKED ANOTHER POSSIBILITY

-

LOCAL HAND SWITCH CONTACTS PREVIOUS EVENT

-

DG 1-1

-. PM PROGRAM

CORRECTIVE ACTION

  • . OPERATOR TRAINING

REVISION TO ADMIN TESTING PROGRAM

REVISION TO ST ART UP PROCEDURE

PM PROGRAM ON BREAKER FUSE* BLOCK ASSEMBLY

PROVIDE INDICATION FOR CLOSING COIL POWER

  • CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL TRAINS.

EMERGENCY DIESEL.GENERATOR:

CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMPS:

CONTAINMENT AIR COOLERS:

SERVICE WATER PUMPS:.

COMPONENT COOLING WATER PUMPS LEFT EOG 1-1 P-548 p:.54c P-78 P-52A P-52C RIGHT EDG 1-2 P-54A VHX-1 VHX-2 VHX-3.

P-7A P-7C P-528 *

  • THE PRESENT LOCA ANALYSIS ASSUMES THAT THE FAILURE OF ONE OF-THE DIG TO START IS THE WORST SINGLE FAILURE. THE COOLING EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE UNDER THIS SCENARIO IS;

. DIG 1-1 AVAILABLE - CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMPS P~54B & C DIG 1-2 AVAILABLE - CONTAINMENT SPRA.Y PUMP P-54A AND CON_TAINMENT AC'S VHX-1, 2, AND 3.

THE PRESENT MSLB ASSUMES THAT THE WORST SINGLE FAILURE IS AN SIS CONTACT THAT FAILS TO START-P-548 AND Cc.

THE COOLING EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE. UNDER THIS SCENARIO IS;

.

-

.

-

CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMP P-54A AND CONTAINMENT AC'S VHX-1, 2, AND 3.

.

. *

RESULTS:

LOCA THE PEAK PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE FOR THE FSAR CASE AND THE POSTULATED CASE ARE LISTED BELOW.

FSAR CASE PEAK PRESSURE

= 69.40 PSIA PEAK TEMPERATURE = 281.8°F P-54C INOPERABLE PEAK PRESSURE * :-- 69.40 PSIA PEAK TEMPERATURE = 281.8°F

MSLB THE PEAK PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE FOR THE FSAR CASE AND

  • THE POSTULATED CASE ARE LISTED BELOW.

FSAR CASE.

PEAK PRESSURE

= 67.15 PSIA PEAK TEMPERATURE = 384.2°F P-54C INOPERABLE PEAK PRESSURE, = 69.40 PSIA PEAK TEM.. PERATURE = 386.8°F EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION = 400°F

. FIGURE 1 LOCR ** P-54C INOPERRBLE~ DIG 1-2 OUT FOR TESTING I/)

I/)

,_

!"--

..

Ill Ill CD CD a:

w (f)

a::::

a..

~

(f) Ill Ill (,{) I/)

w Ill UJ a::::

a::::

a..

~

(/")

z (/")

(.'.)

w a::::

(,{) Ill a.. Ill w..,.

..,.

a:

(...)

D _,

~

I/)

I'll

  • w2 103 IO'f TIME (SECONDSJ

\\

II -*

..

FIGURE2

LOCR ** P-54C INOPERRBLE. DIG 1-2 OUT FOR TESTING o

o.-----.~_.....-.-..r-r"1".....-~-r---"'l"""'T""T"T""r-rr----.---r"""T-.........,r-T"T'l..----.----..............................,...!"T-~......--..-"'t"""'T""T"T""......

7 t-------------.

~~

lJ....

~

C>

lJ....

w D

C>

w w~ oo a::: Pl

~;;:;

J w

t-a:

_J a:::

lJ....

w

~~

0::: ~

w C\\I a_N t-a a:

w u

w

_J

0

-

-

N N

1o2.

103 TIME lSECONbSJ

  • -*

i'

FIGUREJ

..

...

MSLB ** P-54C INOPERRBLE. DIG 1-2 OUT FOR TESTING

~ r.

Ill r-

in in lO lD a:

w (/')

a::

~

CL (J1 in (f)~

w l/l w

a::

a::

(

CL

~

<11

.o z

<11

<..:>.

w

-

a::

(f) in CL lll w~

~*

D CD

_J (/')

L:

I l/l

~

....,

.,..

~*

'fO

.BO.

120 160 200 2'f0 280 320 TIME lSECCJNOSJ

  • -:.-:-*

-.

!* *

FIGURE4

...

MSLB **. P-sqc INOPERRBLE* O/G 1-2 OUT FOR.TESTING

0

..--~-----..---..-r-.,......,.....,.......,,....-~__.._,.._,....,..._'l""'T""'l""'T"T~~-r-------.--,r""'T""'1r-r-r~~..--T--..-"'T'"""l..,....,"T't J

~~~__.,.,____~~~~--'~~~-

102 103 10"

. TIME (SECONOSJ

-**

. '

CONCLUSION:

LOCA

  • *

MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE REMAIN BELOW DESIGN VALUES

PRESSURE AFTER 24 HOURS IS EH:LOW HALF THE DE.SIGN PRESSURE

TEMPERATURE PROFILE IS BELOW THE EEO ENVELOPE MSLB

MAXIMUM PRESSURE REMAINS BELOW THE DESIGN VALUE OF 69.7 PSIA

MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE REMAINS BELOW EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION VALUE OF 400°F

CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL EQUIPMENT INOPERABILITY DATE LEFT RIGHT TOTALS-102HRS

--86HRS

  • * Technical Specification Surveillance Testing

INSPECTION REPORT COMMENTS APPARENT VIOLATION 1.

LICENSEE FAILED TO HAVE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURES FOR THE RETURN OF CONTAINMENT

. SPRAY PUMPS TO SERVICE PRIOR TO CRITICALITY 2.

PUMP P-54C WAS NOT OPERABLE PRIOR TO REACTOR CRITICALITY

.

.

.

.

.

3.

LICENSEE FAILED TO HAVE CONTAINMENT SPRA.Y PUMP P-54C OPERABLE. REDUNDANT COMPONENTS WERE NOT TESTED AND THE DURATION EXCEEDED SEVEN DAYS OTHER ISSUES

  • P-54B
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000255/1991020&oldid=5020237"