IR 05000255/1998003
| ML18066A267 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 08/03/1998 |
| From: | Caldwell J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Thomas J. Palmisano CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| 50-255-98-03, 50-255-98-3, EA-98-375, NUDOCS 9808110155 | |
| Download: ML18066A267 (3) | |
Text
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-255/98003(DRS))
Dear Mr. Palmisano:
Thank you for your letter dated June 24, 1998, addressing the six violations and two deviations cited in Inspection Report No. 50-255/98003(DRS) that was forwarded by our letter dated May 18, 1998. In your letter, you stated that you were contesting example b of violation 98003-07 and deviation 98003-08.
We have reviewed the information you provided for example b of 98003-07 and based on this review, we have determined that this portion of the violation should be rescinded. At the time of the inspection, our rational for the violation was based on review of design drawings and photographs of the instrument sensing lines for the High Pressure Safety Injection (HPSI) and Low Pressure Safety Injection (LPSI) pump flow transmitters because the sensing lines were in an area that was inaccessible while the plant was operating. The photographs appeared to
- indicate that the sensing lines were not adquately sloped. Subsequent to the inspection, you performed physical verification of the sensing lines configuration by walking them down during your recent refueling outage. These walkdowns revealed that the photographs misrepresented the configuration and the HPSI ar1d LPSI pump flow transmitter sensing lines were appropriately sloped. As a result of this new information, we are rescinding this portion of violation 98003-07.
We have reviewed the information you provided for deviation 98003-08 and based on this review, we have determined that this deviation should be rescinded. Our rational for this deviation was based on your letter to the NRC dated January 24, 1978; which stated that the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.6 would be implemented, in that, no provision would exist for automatically transferring loads between redundant power sources. When a subsequent facility change moved the backup power source to a redundant power source,.
which resulted in an automatic transfer between two safety related busses via a transfer switch, we considered this a deviation from a previous commitment. Your response pointed out that the 10 CFR 50.59 review associated with the facility change determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist. In addition, the results of the 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation were
_ reported to_the_ ~BC_in an annual report. Based on industry guidance contained in Nuclear- --
Energy Institute (NEI) "Guideline for Managing NRC Commitments" which was endorsed by the NRC by a letter to NEI dated January 25, 1996, we have concluded that the NRC was
'
adequately informed of your change in the orevious commitment. As a result, we are rescinding this deviation.
9808110155 980803 PDR ADOCK 05000255 G
~eoJ
- We have reviewed your response to the other violations and deviation and found them acceptable. Your actions relative to those violations and deviation will be reviewed during a future NRC Inspection.
- If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. John Jacobson of my staff at (630) 829-9736.
Sincerely, Original Signed by James L. Caldwell Docket No.: 50-255 License No.: DPR-20 James L. Caldwell Deputy Regional Administrator Enclosure:
Ltr dtd 6/24/98 from