ML17285A103
| ML17285A103 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1988 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Sorensen G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17285A104 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8812120001 | |
| Download: ML17285A103 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000397/1988024
Text
ACCELERATED
DISII3UTION,
DEMONSTRXN
SYSTEM
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
PD5
INTERNAL: ACRS
DEDRO
NRR/DLPQ/PEB 11
NRR/DOEA DIR 11
NRR/DREP/RPB
10
NRR/PMAS/ILRB12
HHMKEgfAN,J
REG
-5P
02
COPIES
LTTR ENCL
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
SAMWORTH,R
NRR MORISSEAU,D
NRR/DLPQ/QAB 10
NRR/DREP/EPB
10
NRR/DRIS DIR 9A
NUDOCS-ABSTRACT
OGC/HDS2
RGN5
FILE
01
COPIES
LTTR ENCL
1
'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t'
1
1
1
1
REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8812120001
DOC.DATE: 88/11/23
NOTARIZED: NO
FACIL:50-397 WPPSS Nuclear Project, Unit 2, Washington Public Powe
AUTH.NAME
AUTHOR AFFILIATION
MARTIN,J.B.
Region 5, Ofc of the Director
RECIP.NAME
RECIPIENT AFFILIATION
SORENSEN,G.C.,
Washington Public Power Supply System
SUBJECT:
Forwards Insp Rept 50-397/88-24 -on 880822-0902
& notice of
violation.
DISTRIBUTION CODE: IE01D
COPIES
RECEIVED:LTR ENCL ~ SIZE:
TITLE: General
(50 Dkt)-Insp Rept/Notice of Violation Response
NOTES:
DOCKET
05000397
R
I
8
D
D
8
TERNAL: LPDR
1
1
1
1
NRC PDR
RESL HARTIN,D
1
1
1,
1
R
I
S
A
MTE XO ALL EPICS~~ AX.IPrneS.
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE RESTE!
CXÃZACT %HE DOCUMENI'ONGEAL DESK,
ROOM Pl-37
(EXT. 20079)
KO EXZMINKVERKR SAME PKH DIS'HGBUTXClN
LISTS KK DOCUMENTS YOU DCtN~T MEED)
D
S
"TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES
REQUIRED:
LTTR
24
ENCL
24
~S Ajoy
P0
I'y
0"
+**++
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
1460 MARIALANE,SUITE 210
WALNUTCREEK, CALIFORNIA94696
.NOV 23
$988
QDQ~
Docket Nos.
50-397
Washington Public Power Supply System
P.
0.
Box 968
3000 George Washington
Way
Richland, Washington
99352
Attention:
Mr.
G.
C. Sorensen,
Manager
Regulatory
Programs
Gentlemen:
Subject:
NRC Inspection of Nuclear Plant
No.
2
This letter refers to the inspection
conducted
by Messrs.
A. O'Angelo,
G. Fiorelli, and J.
Tatum of this office,
R.
Samworth
and
P.
Preston of the
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,
and Mr. B.
L. Collins,
NRC contractor,
from August 22,
1988 to September
2, 1988, of activities authorized
by
NRC
License
No.
NPF-21 and to the discussion of our findings held by Mr. O'Angelo
'ith
members of the Supply System staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
Areas examined during this inspection
are described in the enclosed
inspection
report.
Within these
areas,
the inspection consisted of selective
examinations of procedures
and representative
records,
interviews with
personnel,
and observations
by the inspectors.
Based
on the results of this inspection, it appears that certain of your
activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements,
as set
forth in the Notice of Violation enclosed
herewith as Appendix A.
Your
response
to this Notice is to be submitted in accordance
with the provisions
as stated in the enclosed
The intent of the inspection
was to review your work activities in the areas
of operations,
maintenance,
engineering,
and several
of your oversight groups.
To perform this review, the team focused
on the Emergency Diesel Generator
(EDG) system
and the Nuclear Steam Supply Shutoff System
due to their
importance in responding to various postulated
events.
Overall Conclusions
A summary of the team's findings in each inspection area is enclosed
as
Appendix
B to this letter.
After considering the various findings and
observations,
the team reached
the following three conclusions:
Control of work activities and operations is weak, resulting in the
informal conduct
and documentation of your activities.
Plant problems are not being adequately identified at the working level.
SSi2i2000i SSii23
ADOCK 0500039'7
'
gtn~g
g 3 0988
The followup of identified plant problems is not aggressive.
These conclusions
are supported
by a number of specific findings.
In the area
of control of activities,
a review of maintenance
documentation
found that the
written instructions provided to personnel
were often minimal and that
documentation
of finished work was not always complete
enough to understand
what had been
done.
In one instance,
work documentation
erroneously indicated
that electrical
connections
had not been reterminated
when the job was
finished.
In another instance,
a worker was observed to be modifying a
calibration procedure while the calibration was being performed, without
following the plant procedure to control procedure
changes.
Regarding the
EDG's, the associated
surveillance procedures
did not provide guidance to
implement vendor recommendations
in several
instances.
In the area of plant
operations,
the consideration of reporting requirements
was observed
in one
instance to be inconsistent,
such that a Reactor Protective
System actuation
was erroneously
not reported to the
NRC, although
a very similar event that
had occurred the previous
day was reported.
With re'gard to the identification of plant problems
by your personnel,
the
team identified a number of deficiencies
associated
with the
EDG,s that could
and should have
been identified by your personnel.
In another instance,
your
staff failed to adequately identify in a timely manner to management
a minor
water hammer event which occurred during the startup of a
RHR pump.
Although
this water
hammer and a recent similar occurrence
were well known by the
operating crew, the crew appeared
to treat the occurrences
as normal,
and did
not enter either in the operations
log.
Finally, fol'lowing a discussion
between the
NRC team and plant management,
your investigation revealed
a
significant deficiency with the
RHR pump discharge
Concerning followup of identified problems,
the team concluded that
housekeeping
in the drywell was poor and was the result of an inadequate
cleanup at the conclusion of the most recent outage.
The team determined that
drywell housekeeping
had been brought to the attention of the Plant Operations
Committee, but the committee
had not followed the problem to resolution.
The
team also identified several
instances
where,
12-18 months earlier, the
calibration of measuring
and test equipment
had been determined to be out of
specification,
but, the effect of the conditions
had not been determined.
In
another instance,
a non-conformance
report concerning the spurious operation
of a
RHR valve was closed out based
on an explanation that the spurious
closure
was the result of maintenance
in progress.
However, the associated
maintenance
work request indicated that the maintenance
work had been
completed the day before the spurious operation.
At the exit meeting,
Mr. Oxsen acknowledged
the team's
conclusions
and
observed that the conclusions
were consistent with other recent
assessments
of
WHP-2 activities.
He further noted that the Supply System
has initiated
changes
and programs to enhance their performance in the areas
discussed.
These three types of concerns
have been the topics of past
NRC meetings
and
correspondence
with the Supply System,
and our current findings reinforce our
earlier conclusions.
These
weaknesses
result from insufficient management
involvement in plant activities,
management
s failure to convey its
expectations
of personnel
performance,
and management's
insufficient follow
through
on corrective actions.
Any changes
or program enhancements
planned or
NOV 2 3
198S
initiated should include sufficient management
involvement to effect basic
changes
in personnel
performance at the working level
and in higher levels of
management.
The results of your actions
should
be reported in future
management
meetings.
In accordance
with 10 CFR 2.790 (a),
a copy of this letter and the enclosure
will be placed in the
NRC Public Document
Room.
The responses
directed
by this letter and the attached
Notice are not subject
to the clearance
procedures
of the Office of Management
and Budget as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
PL 96-511.
Should you have
any questions
concerning this inspection,
we will be glad to
discuss
them with you.
Sin erely',
John
B. Martin
Regional Administrator
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A - Notice of Violation
2.
Appendix
B - Areas Inspected
and Results
3.
Inspection
Report No. 50-397/88-24
cc w/enclosures:
C.
M. Powers,
A.
G. Hos'ler,
G.
D. Bouchey,
G.
E.
Doupe,
A.
Lee Oxsen
State of Washington (Curtis Eschels)
N.
S. Reynolds,
Esq.,
BCP8R
'
~0V 23
iS88
bcc w/enclosures:
Project Inspector
Resident Inspector
docket file
G.
Cook
B. Faulkenberry
J. Martin
T. Foley,
bcc w/o enclosure
2:
M. Smith
J. Zo11icoffer
REGION V/ t
JTatum
~
GFi relli
11/)$ /88 ~'lPS/88
~(p'g~
ll/l~z/88
/pe,
SRi chards
Adehnsen
11/l~/88
11/~7/88
EST
COPY ) fKg EST
COPY
g
T COPY
g
COPY
g
EQU ST
COPY
g
YES /
NO
.YES /
NO
S /
NO
ES /
NO
YES /
NO
RPate
ll/g 88
DFK r ch
JBM
in
ll/iy /88
/88
E
U ST
COPY ]
COPY ] REQUEST
COPY
g
YES /
NO
ES /
NO
YES /
NO
TO
ES /
NO