ML17262A735
| ML17262A735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 01/30/1992 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mccredy R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17262A736 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9202050432 | |
| Download: ML17262A735 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000244/1991201
Text
sS RECII
P0
~~a
5 Q
pp
J
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
January
30,
1992
Docket No. 50-244
Rochester
Gas ard Electric Corporation
ATIN: Dr. Rck~ C. Mecmdy
Vice President
Ginna Nuclear Productian
89 East AVenue
Rochester,
14649
Dear Dr. MecIxx2y:
SUB3ECT:
SERVICE WATER SYSTB4 OPERATIQHAL
(50-244/91-201)
I have enclosed the report of the service water system cperatianal perfcaxence
inspection
(SWSOPI) corducted by M. A. Miller ard ot2mr U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Camnission
(NRC) personnel fran December
2 through 20, 1991.
At
the exit meeting on Decemt~ 20, 1991, the inspection team discussed its
firdmps with you and membexs of your staff.
'Xhe inspection team assessed
the cperational performance of the sexvice water
system
(SWS) .
In particular, the team reviewed in detail the design,
maintenance,
apemtion,
ard surveillance and testing of the SNS.
She team
also assessed
the planned or nxnpleted actions for Ginna in response to
Generic Letter 89-13, "Service Water System Problems Affecting Safety-Related
Equiprent," issued on July 18,
1989.
Wea3messes
identified by the team include:
(1) a failure to praperly control
engine<ning documents
and
(2)
tive aperatianal
philosaphy regarding
performing equi~Ient testing while simQtaneausly
ta)cing redurdant equipnent
requuxd to perform safety functions out of sexvice ard performing lorg-texm
service water pump maintenance during cperatians.
With respect to taking
equipneat rexpd~l to perform safety functions out of sexvice,
we are
concerned
about the lack of procechuas to ensure that equi@re~ is nat
rerdered inoperable by being removed fran sexvice while ocapanian equignent is
urdergoing testing.
Although your impleInentation of GL 89-13 actions was not
fully satisfactory,
the team noted that the devel~eM of a cxxnprehensive
dacunent to adcb~s the Ginna
SWS and GL 89-13 topics was a positive
initiative.
With the exception of the
tive aperational philosophy
the trainirg pragraIns for both ames.
review ard co~ive actions are necessary:
9202050432
920130
PDRI>"ADOCK OS000244
8
'
h
11
~,
(
>
y
s
l
s>if
P8 1
V
H
v +
'( il I(
Robert C. Meum~
-2-
January
30,
1992
4
(1) xeanalysis of the SNS hydraulic model and applicatian of its results to
the system,
(2) assessnent
of the single failure of a pump discharge check
/~valve,
(3) establishment of the appropriate
law-pxessuxe setpoint for the SÃS,
result of the crass-connected
canfiguratian and reaediatian
as necessary,
(5) evaluation of pmgperatiaeal test results,
and (6) inclusian of the
~xapriate
rMmber of operable punps in the Ginna Technical Specifications
(TS) .
We are confident that these items can be satisfactorily resolved by
Rochester
Gas arxl Electric (RGB) in a reasonable
time frame.
In addition,
we
nate that appropriate
campensatoxy
measures
have been put in place for items
(2) and
(6) .
Until final resolution of the abave six actions,
yau need to
assure yourselves of the cantinued functionality of the SNS.
She abave issues give rise to scane uncertainty as to system opex~ility.
However,
we conclude that, with the interim actions taken,
a presumption of
aImrability is waxxanted while the issues
abave are fully resolved.
We request that you respond within 60 days indicating the actians campleted
and remain~ and the remits of your assessment
of the carrtirrued operability
of the SWS.
At the exit meeting,
you had canmitted to suhnit a letter
discussing the SNS hydraulic model assessment.
Yau had also cammitted at the
exit meeting to impose campensatory
measures
associated with the potential for
a sir@le failure of a pump discharge check valve and to mdxnit a letter
identifying inaccuracies in the staff's safety evaluation of the SNS developed
during the Systematic Evaluation Pxogram.
Ghe staff, as ~rapriate, will
reevaluate the SNS in light of the inaccuracies
Region I will issue any appropriate enforcement action resulting fram this
inspection.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a),
a copy of this 1~~ and the enclosures
willbe placed in the NRC Public Donnnent Roam.
Should you have any questions
concexniLng this inspection,
please contact me or
M. A. Miller (301-504-2964) of this office.
Sincexely,
Division of Reactor Projects, I/II
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-244/91-201
cc w/encl.:
see next page
- SEE PREVICXJS
CONCXJEGKNCES
RSIB: GRIS
RI
- DSkay
~slak
01/27/92
01/28/92
RI
~SKChaudhaxy
01/28/92
SPLB:NRR
~turn
01/28/92
01/
/92
) /P/92
SC: RSIB: GRIS
~RAQramm
01/27/92
C:RSIB: GRIS
~EVImbro
01/27/92
D:GRIS:NRR
- HKGrimes
01/29/92
Robert C. Hecxecty
January
30 ,
1 992
(1) reanalysis of the
SNS hydraulic model and ~lication of its results to
the system,
(2) assessment
of the single failure of a puap discharge MM
Ip~ 1~
lg ~
tt
(4) assess'.nt
of any single failures that would impair systen operation as a
result of the cnxa-cormected configuration and reaediation as necm~ry,
(5) evaluation of preoperatianal test results,
and (6) inclusian of the
rcpriate
numbers of operable pm~ in the Ginna Technical Specifications
(TS) .
We are confident that these items can be satisfactorily resolved by
Roch~ Gas and Electric
(RG&E) in a reasonable
time frame.
In addition,
we
note that ~rcpriate ccapensatory
measures
have been put in place for items
(2) and (6) .
Until final resolutian of the abave six actians,
you need to
assure yourselves of the cantinued functianality of the SNS.
tY
Hcarever,
we conclude that, with the interim actians taken,
a presunption of
cperability is warranted while the issues
abave are fully resolved.
We request that yau nmpxxl within 60 days indicating the actions carpleted
and remains
an9 the results of your asamanent of the continued operability
of the SNS.
At the exit meetirg, you had ocaxnitted to suhait a letter
discuming the
SWS hydraulic model assesuient.
You had also axxnitted at the
exit meeting to h~e cxxrpensatory
measures
associated with the potential for
a sir@le failure of a pump discharge check valve and to suhnit a letter
identifying inaccumcies in the staff's safety evaluatian of the SNS develcped
during the Systematic Evaluation Program.
Ghe staff, as ~rcpriate, will
reevaluate the SNS in light of the inaocumcies contained in the SEP SER.
Region I will issue any ~ropriate enforcement action resulting frcxn this
inspection.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a),
a ccpy of this letter ard the enclosures
will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roan.
Should you have any questions
cxnce 'his ~ration, please contact me or
M. A. Miller (301-504-2964) of this office.
S'nclosure:
Inspection Report 50-244/91-201
cc w/encl.:
see next page
Steven A. Varga,
irector
Division of Reactor Projects, I/II
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Rob~ C. Kmvady
W3M
Ginna Nuclear Pater Station
cc w/enclosure:
'Ihamas A. Moslak
Senior Resident Inspector
R.E. Ginna Plant
V.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Ccmm.
1503 Zake Road
Ontario,
New York 14519
Regional Adtnini.~tor, Region I
V.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Ganm.
475 Allendale Road
King of Prussia,
19406
Donna Ross
Division of Policy Analysis
& Plannirg
New York State Energy Office
Agency Building 2
Empire State Plaza
Albany, New York 12223
Charlie Donaldson,
Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
New York ~erhnent of Law
120 Broadway
Nicholas S. Reynolds
Winston
& Strawn
1400 L Street,
N.W.
DC 20005-3502
Xhelma Wideman
Director, Wayne County Dnergency
Management Office
Wayne County Emergency Operations
Center
7370 Route 31
Lyons,
New York 14489
Susan Perry
Administrator, Monroe County Office
111 West Fall Road
Rochester,
New York 14620
I
I
Robert C. Mecredy
ltiadht
'ERurley,NRR
FJMiraglia,
MH~ell, NRR
JGPartlcw,
HK3rimes,
EVImbro, NRR
RAQramm,
MMiller, NRR
RISpessard,
SAVarga,
WButler, NRR
AJohnson,
'INoslak,
RX
PKEapan, Rl
JDurr, RI
JLinville, RI
NIazarus,
RI
Region I EDO Coordinator
I
Regional Division Directors
In~ection Team
LHR
ACRS (3)
OGC (3)
1S Distribution
a
I
~ l
0