ML17059B746
| ML17059B746 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1997 |
| From: | Hehl C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Sylvia B NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17059B747 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-220-97-80, 50-410-97-80, NUDOCS 9711030001 | |
| Download: ML17059B746 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000220/1997080
Text
October 24,
1997
Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia
Executive Vice President
and Chief Nuclear Officer
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation
Nuclear Learning Center
450 Lake Road
Oswego, NY 13126
SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-220/97-80 AND 50-410/97-80
Dear Mr. Sylvia:
This letter refers to the NRC inspection conducted
by Mr. Gordon Hunegs and others from
this office from August 4 - 8, 1997, and from August 18 - 22, 1997, at the Nine Mile
Point Nuclear Station, Units
1 and 2. The purpose of this inspection was to determine
whether licensee activities were conducted
safely, and in accordance
with the NRC
requirements.
The inspection focus was on the effectiveness
of your problem identification
and resolution processes.
Overall, the team found that the administrative control procedures
for the corrective action
program were adequate;
however, some weaknesses
were noted with the implementation
of the corrective action program.
While the Nine Mile Point staff was generally effective in
identifying problems, shortcomings
were identified with the quality of root cause
determinations,
corrective actions and documentation.
Root causes
and corrective actions
were not always fully developed
and therefore problems in some areas have continued.
Several weaknesses
in the programs to identify and address
human performance issues
were also apparent.
The team also noted that there have been several recent initiatives to
improve the station performance
in these areas.
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
OFFICIAL RECORO
C~
IE:Ol
Based on the results of this inspection,
a violation of NRC requirements
occurred.
The
~
violation concerned
administration control of the justification for the extension of
deviation/event
reports.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the
instructions specified in the enclosed
Notice of Violation (Notice) when preparing your
response.
In your response,
you should document the specific actions taken and any
additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence.
Your response
may reference previous
docketed correspondence
if the correspondence
adequately
addresses
the required
response.
Please include as a part of your response
those corrective actions you intend to
take to understand
the broader implications of these violations.
After reviewing your
response
to this Notice, including your proposed
corrective actions and the results of
future inspections,
the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is
necessary
to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
To the extent possible,
your response
should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards
information so that it can be placed. in the PDR without redaction.
9'Tii03000i 97i024
ADOCK 05000220
6
III. En ineerin
E4
Engineering Staff Knowledge and Performance
E4.1
250-VDC Batte
Load Calculation
a.
Ins ection Sco
e 37551
The licensee identified that the present 250-VDC loading calculation did not model the
worst case load profile for the battery. The licensee initiated PIF D1997-06167 to
document the concern.
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's
PIF, the licensee's initial
operability determination (OPD 97-87), and prior history and docketed information with
respect to the 250-VDC battery.
b.
Observations and Findin s
In response
to inspectors'uestions
at another Commonwealth Edison station, the
licensee reviewed the battery calculation and identified that the loading calculation
(PMED 898230-01, Revision 11) for the 250 Vdc battery did not model the worst case
load profile. The worst case loa".. profile existed when a unit battery was aligned to the
swing charger and a loss of the unit's diesel generator occurred concurrent with a
loss-of-coolant accident.
This scenario, which added an additional 75 ampere load on
the battery for a four-hour duration, was not verified by the last Technical Specification
battery load profile surveillance test. The licensee's operability determination concluded
that the station batteries were operable so long as they were aligned to their respective
unit chargers.
The licensee provided guidance to the operators to declare the battery
inoperable and enter the appropriate Technical Specification LCO action statement ifthe
battery was aligned to the swing charger.
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's
operability determination and did not identify any substantive concerns with the licensee's
conclusions.
The NRC previously documented concerns with the licensee's 250 Vdc battery sizing
calculations in inspection report 50-237/96-201; 50-249/96-201 (Independent Safety
Inspection (ISI) of Dresden Nuclear Power Station, dated December 24, 1996). The ISI
report stated, "The licensee initiated a PIF to document the discovery of the overlap of
loads for certain MOVs and the need to revise Calculation PMED-898230-01." The ISI
report also documented that "The licensee stated that the calculation will be formally
revised to incorporate these issues."
Pending further NRC review of the Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report, the licensee's response to the ISI report, and the revised battery
calculation, this is an Unresolved Item (URI 50-237/970156(DRP);
50-249/97013-06(DRP)).
c.
Conclusions
The licensee missed prior opportunities to identify and resolve the 250 Vdc battery
loading issue.
Engineering personnel did not adequately review the battery calculation
when responding to previously identified technical concerns.
21
0
B. Ralph Sylvia
In accordance
with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice,"
a copy of this letter
and its enclosures,
and your response
will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Your cooperation with us is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Original Signed
by:
Charles W. Hehl, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
Docket Nos.
50-220, 50-410
License Nos.
Enclosures:
1.
2.
NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-220/97-80 and 50-410/97-80
cc w/encls:
R. Abbott, Vice President 5 General Manager - Nuclear
C. Terry, Vice President- Safety Assessment
and Support
J. Conway, Vice President
- Nuclear Engineering
K. Dahlberg, Vice President
- Nuclear Operations
D. Wolniak, Manager, Licensing
J. Warden, New York Consumer Protection Branch
G. Wilson, Senior Attorney
M. Wetterhahn, Winston and Strawn
J
~ Rettberg, New York State Electric and Gas Corporation
P. Eddy, Director, Electric Division, Department of Public Service, State
of New York
C. Donaldson,
Esquire, Assistant Attorney General, New York Department of Law
J. Vinquist, MATS, Inc.
F. Valentino, President,
New York State Energy Research
and Development Authority
J. Spath, Program Director, New York State Energy Research
and Development Authority
B. Ralph Sylvia
3
Distribution w/encls:.
H. Miller, RA/W. Axelson, DRA (1)
Region
I Docket Room (with concurrences)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
PUBLIC
NRC Resident Inspector
L. Doerflein, DRP
T. Moslak, DRP
R. Junod,
DRS Files (2)
E. Knutson,
Rl
G. Galletti, NRR
C. Smith, NRR
Distribution w/encls:
(VIAE-MAIL)
K. Kennedy,
Rl EDO Coordinator
B. Norris - Nine Mile Point
S. Bajwa, NRR
D. Hood, NRR
R. Correia, NRR
F. Talbot, NRR
M. Campion,
Rl
Inspection Program Branch (IPAS)
DOCDESK
DOCUMENT NAME: G:iBRANCH1iNMP9780.INS
To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without
attachment/enclosure
"E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure
"N" = No copy
OFFICE
RI/DRP
NAME
GHunegs
<
~/J
RI/DRP
RI/DRP
LDoerflein
+
CHehl
DATE
1 0/n./97
10/7 97
10/Ig/97
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY