ML17177A448
| ML17177A448 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1992 |
| From: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Reed C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| EA-92-088, EA-92-88, NUDOCS 9206020286 | |
| Download: ML17177A448 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000237/1992009
Text
- -;
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION Ill
799 ROOSEVELT ROAD
GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 60137
Docket Nos. 50-237; 50-249
. Conunonwea l th Edi son Company
ATTN:
Mr. Cordell Reed
- Senior Vice President
Opus West *III
1400 Opus Place
Downers Grove, *1L 60515
Dear Mr. Reed:
This confirms our plans as discussed between Mr. Richard Knop of this
office and Mr. Terry Schuester of your staff to mov_e the enforcement
confe~ence previously s~h~duled for 1:00 p.m. (CDT) rin.May 27, 1992, ~i
the Re~ion Ill office .at 799 Roosevelt Road, Building 4, Glen.Ellyn,*
Illinois to_ 9:.00 a.m. (CDT) on June 4, 199'2, at the same location.
The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the findings of an inspect~on
performed at .Dresden which identified apparent violations of NRC
requirements, as* discussed in Inspection Report50-237/92009(DRP); *
.50'-249/92009(DRP), sent to you on May
19~ 1992.
The sununary of the
apparent violations enclosed in our May 18, 1992,;letter is still valid,
and: you s"hould. :be prepared to discuss those issues as previously *.
.
.
requested .. -One ~dditional concern and ap~ar~nt violati~n has be~n
identified, of ~hich you should also be prepared to provide an oral*
presentation and* a concise written.handout addf~ssing the root cau~es an~
contributing factors, and any corrective actioni you hav~ taken or
planned. This additional concern is provided in the enclosure.
If you have any questions regarding this meeting, please contact
Ms. Patricia Lougheed at (708) 790-5579.
Enclosure:
As stated
See attached distribution
9206020286 920522
ADOCK 05000237
G
Sincerely,
(JL/ J::J 4-----~-------/'--*
Edward G. Greenman
Director Division of Reactor Projects
Commonwealth Edison
cc w/enclosure:
D. Galle, Vice President - BWR
.Operations
T. Kovach,.Nuclear Licensing
Manager
C. Schroeder, Station Manager
DCD/DCB {RIDS)
OC/LFDCB
Resident Inspectors Dresden,
LaSalle, Quad Cities
R. Hubbard
J~*McCaffrey, Chief, Public
- Utilitfes Division*
R. Newmann, Office of Public
Counsel,-State of Illinois Center
B. Siegel, Licensing Project
Manager, NRR
C. J. Paperiello, Riii
State Liaison Officer*
J. Lieberman, Director, Office
of Enforcement
J. Goldberg, Office of the General
-Counci 1
J. Partlow, NRR
2
MAY 2 2 1992
l
Dresden.
The additional concern and apparent violation identified related to the
water submergence capability of the Unit 2/3 diesel generator cooling
water pump, and its affect -0n the operability of the Unit 2/3 diesel
generator.
In 1986, as part of an Appendix R modification, the cables to the Unit
2/3 diesel generator water pump motor were replaced.
No evidence exists
to show that the previously installed sealant against water intrusion was
replaced at t~e time of the modification.
In 1991, you identified that
the Unit 2/3 motor was not sealed against water intrusion, and replaced
the seal.
Technical Specification LO requires,* in part, for a system to.be
operable, all necessary attendant instrumentation, controls, normal and
-emergency electrical power sources, cooling or seal water, lubrication or
other auxiliary equipment that are required for the system to operate
must be capable of performi_ng their related support functions.
Because
the Unit 2/3 diesel generator cooling water pump motor was not sealed
against water intrusion, it ~as incapable of performing its safety
function under conditions of cribhouse flooding.
Therefore, the Unit 2/3
diesel generator was intiperabl~ under the same conditions.
Technical Specification 3.9~B.2 allows reactor operation to continue for
up to seven days, with certain shorter limits under specific *conditions,
if one diesel ~enerator i~ made or found to be inoperable for any teason.
~he period in ~hich the Unit 2/3 diesel generator was inoperable,
- exceeded this seven day limiting condition. for operation.
'
'
As part of your.*discussion, you should b.e prepared to discuss the. safety
significcmce of the Unit*2/3 diesel generator being inoperable* due to the
Unit 2/3 diesel generator cooling water pump not being sealed against
water intrusion.
You should also be prepared to discuss the reasons why
the safety evaluation and*design review for the 1989 modification failed
to identify that the pump motor required sealing against water intrusion.