ML17325B592
| ML17325B592 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 05/14/1999 |
| From: | Grobe J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Powers R AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER CO., INC. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17325B593 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-315-99-04, 50-315-99-4, 50-316-99-04, 50-316-99-4, EA-99-116, NUDOCS 9905210214 | |
| Download: ML17325B592 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000315/1999004
Text
god 4CCy
0
Cy
j'g
<<+*<<"
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION
REGION Ili
801 WARRENVILI.EROAD
LISLE. ILLINOIS60532.4351
Hay 14,
1999
EA 99-116
Mr. R. P. Powers
Senior Vice President
Nuclear Generation Group
American Electric Power Company
500 Circle Drive
Buchanan, Ml 49107-1395
SUBJECT:
D. C. COOK INSPECTION REPORT 50-315/99004(DRP); 50-316/99004(DRP)
Dear Mr. Powers:
On April 16, 1999, the NRC completed an inspection at your D. C. Cook Units 1 and 2 reactor
facilities. The inspection was an examination of activities conducted under your license as they
relate to compliance with the Commission rules and regulations and with the conditions of your
license.
Areas reviewed included Operations, Maintenance, Engineering, and Plant Support.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and
representative
records, interviews with personnel, and observations of activities in progress.
The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.
During this inspection period, we noted examples where'operators
demoristrated a conservative
'ecision-making
philosophy. We also observed that maintenance activities were generally
performed in accordance with approved procedures and utilized appropriate radiological
protection practices.
In addition, we noted that plant maintenance
and engineering personnel
expanded the scope of problem investigations, where appropriate, to include other equipment
and programs related to the failed equipment.
A particularly noteworthy example was the
decision to promptly inspect all 4 kilovoltbreakers following the identification of a loose anti-
shock spring in a 4 kilovoltbreaker.
In contrast to the improving performance described above, continuing problems were identified
with the corrective action program, the adequacy of maintenance and surveillance test
procedures, and the performance of required safety evaluations.
In addition, you did not
recognize that changes
in the reactor coolant system temperature also resulted in reactivity
changes until prompted by NRC inspectors.
Consequently, you did not know ifyou had
operated the facilityin compliance with your Technical Specifications until you subsequently
performed a detailed engineering evaluation of several evolutions which had the potential to
add positive reactivity. We also noted that your procedural controls on the usage of overtime
were weak which resulted in your staff having a difficulttime evaluating your overtime usage.
Your continued attention in these areas appears warranted.
Based on the results of this inspection, the NRC has determined that four violations of NRC
requirements occurred.
The first violation, which was identified by your staff, involved three
safety-related surveillance test procedures for the centrifugal charging pumps that contained
inadequate instructions to operate the pumps safely due to deficiencies in the procedure
99052i02i4 9905i4
ADQCK 050003i5
8
R. Powers
-2-
revision process.
The second. violation, which was identified by NRC inspectors, involved two
examples of condition reports that were inappropriately categorized as conditions adverse to
quality rather than as significant conditions adverse to quality. The third violation, which was
identified by NRC inspectors, involved the failure to perform a 10 CFR Part 50.59 safety
evaluation for a procedure change.
The fourth violation resulted from review of a 1996 event
report. That violation was identified by your staff and involved the failure to followthe
appropriate Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation Action Statement for an
inoperable pressurizer power operated relief valve.
These Severity Level IVviolations are being treated as Non-Cited Violations (NCVs).
Appendix C of the Enforcement Policy requires that for Severity Level IVviolations to be
dispositioned as NCVs, they be appropriately placed in the licensee's corrective action program.
Implicit in that requirement is that the corrective action program be fullyacceptable.
The
D. C. Cook Plant corrective action program was not adequate and has been the focus of
significant attention by your staff to improve the program. While your staff and the NRC have
not yet concluded that the corrective action program is fullyeffective, the corrective action
program improvement efforts are underway and captured in the D. C. Cook Restart Plan which
is under the formal oversight of the NRC through the NRC Manual Chapter 0350 Process,
"Staff Guidelines for Restart Approval." Consequently, these issues are being dispositioned as
NCVs.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its
enclosure willbe placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Sincerely,
//s// J.
A. Grobe
John A. Grobe, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-315/99004(DRP);
50-316/99004(DRP)
cc w/encl:
A. C. Bakken III, Site Vice President
M. Rencheck, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering
R. Whale, Michigan Public Service Commission
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Emergency Management
Division
Ml Department of State Police
D. Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists
DOCUMENT NAME: G'ACOONDCC99004.DRP
- See previous concurrences
To receive a co
of this document, indicate in the box:
C
= Co
w/o attach/enct
6" = Co
w/attach/enct
N = ufo co
OFFICE
NAME
DATE
- RIII:DRP
Cobe /k'c
05/07/99
- Rill:DRP
E
Ve el
05/07/99
- Rill:EICS
N
Cla
on
05/07/99
RIII:D
Gro
05/
/ 9
OFFIC!ALRECORD COPY
R. Powers
-2-
revision process.
The second violation, which was identified by NRC inspectors, involved two
examples of condition reports that were inappropriately categorized as conditions adverse to
quality rather than as significant conditions adverse to quality. The third violation, which was
identified by NRC inspectors, involved the failure to perform a 10 CFR Part 50.59 safety
evaluation for a procedure change.
The fourth violation, which was identified by your staff in
1996, involved the failure to followthe appropriate Technical SpeciTication Limiting Condition for
Operation Action Statement for an inoperable pressurizer power operated relief valve.
These Severity Level IVviolations are being treated as Non-Cited Violations (NCVs).
Appendix C of the Enforcement Policy requires that for Severity Level IVviolations to be
dispositioned as NCVs, they be appropriately placed in the licensee's corrective action program.
Implicit in that requirement is that the corrective action program be fullyacceptable.
The
D. C. Cook Plant corrective action program was not adequate
and has been the focus of
significant attention by your staff to improve the program.
While your staff and the NRC have
not yet concluded that the corrective action program is fullyeffective, the corrective action
program improvement efforts are underway and captured in the D. C. Cook Restart Plan which
is under the formal oversight of the NRC through the NRC Manual Chapter 0350 Process,
"Staff Guidelines for Restart Approval." Consequently, these issues will be dispositioned as
NCVs.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its
enclosure willbe'laced
in the NRC Public Document Room.
Sincerely,
John A. Grobe, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-315/99004(DRP);
50-316/99004(DRP)
cc w/encl:
A. C. Bakken III, Site Vice President
M. Rencheck, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering
D. Cooper, Plant Manager
R. Whale, Michigan Public Service Commission
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Emergency Management
Division
Ml Department of State Police
D. Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists
DOCUMENT NAME: G: tCOOKttDCC99004.DRP
To receive a co
of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Co
w/o attach/enct
E" = Co
w/attach/enct "N = No cop
OFFICE
RIII:DRP
NAME
Cobe /k c
DATE
05/
/99
Rl I I:DRP
/"-
Ve el
05/
/ 9
RIII:EICS
Cla
on
05/
/99
RIII:DR
Grob
05/
/
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
R. Powers
-2-
revision process.
The second violation, which was identified by NRC inspectors, involved two
examples of condition reports that were inappropriately categorized as conditions adverse to
quality rather than as significant conditions adverse to quality. The third violation, which was
identified by NRC inspectors, involved the failure to perform a 10 CFR Part 50.59 safety
evaluation for a procedure change.
The fourth violation, which was identified by your staff in
1996, involved the failure to followthe appropriate Technical Specification Limiting Condition for
Operation Action Statement for an inoperable pressurizer power operated relief valve.
These Severity Level IVviolations are being treated as Non-Cited Violations (NCVs).
Appendix C of the Enforcement Policy requires that for Severity Level IVviolations to be
dispositioned as NCVs, they be appropriately placed in the licensee's corrective action program.
Implicitin that requirement is that the corrective action program be fullyacceptable.
The
D. C. Cook Plant corrective action program was not adequate
and has been the focus of
significant attention by your staff to improve the program. While your staff and the NRC have
not yet concluded that the corrective action program is fullyeffective, the corrective action
program improvement efforts are underway and captured in the D. C. Cook Restart Plan which
is under the formal oversight of the NRC through the NRC Manual Chapter 0350 Process,
"Staff Guidelines for Restart Approval." Consequently, these issues will be dispositioned as
NCVs.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2,790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its
enclosure willbe placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Sincerely,
John A. Grobe, Director
- Division of Reactor Safety
Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-315/99004(DRP);
50-316/99004(DR
P)
cc w/encl:
A. C. Bakken III, Site Vice President
M. Rencheck, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering
D. Cooper, Plant Manager
R. Whale, Michigan Public Service Commission
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Emergency Management
Division
Ml Department of State Police
D. Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists
DOCUMENT NAME: GACOONDCC99004.DRP
To receNe a co
of this document, indicate In the box:
C =
w/o attach/enct
E = Co
w/attach/enct
N = No co
OFFICE
NAME
RIII:DRP
Cobe /k'c
Cla
on
Ve el
Rill:DRP
8
Rill:EICS
Rill:DR
Grob
DATE
05/
/99
05/
/ 9
05/
/99
05/
/
OFFICIALRECORD COPY
R. Powers
-2-
revision process.
The second violation, which was identified by NRC inspectors, involved two
examples of condition reports that were inappropriately categorized as conditions adverse to
quality rather than as significant conditions adverse to quality. The third violation, which was
identified by NRC inspectors, involved the failure to perform a 10 CFR Part 50.59 safety
evaluation for a procedure change.
The fourth violation resulted from review of a 1996 event
report. That violation was identified by your staff and involved the failure to followthe
appropriate Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation Action Statement for an
inoperable pressurizer power operated relief valve.
These Severity Level IVviolations are being treated as Non-Cited Violations (NCVs).
Appendix C of the Enforcement Policy requires that for Severity Level IVviolations to be
dispositioned as NCVs, they be appropriately placed in the licensee's corrective action program.
Implicit in that requirement is that the corrective action program be fullyacceptable.
The
D. C. Cook Plant corrective action program was not adequate and has been the focus of
significant attention by your staff to improve the program.
While your staff and the NRC have
not yet concluded that the corrective action program is fullyeffective, the corrective action
program improvement efforts are underway and captured in the D. C. Cook Restart Plan which
is under the formal oversight of the NRC through the NRC Manual Chapter 0350 Process,
"Staff Guidelines for Restart Approval." Consequently, these issues are being dispositioned as
NCVs.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy'of this letter and its
enclosure willbe placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Sincerely,
Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316
/s/ J.
A. Grobe
John A. Grobe, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-315/99004(DRP);
50-316/99004(DRP)
cc w/encl:
A. C. Bakken III, Site Vice President
M. Rencheck, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering
R. Whale, Michigan Public Service Commission
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Emergency Management
Division
Ml Department of State Police
D. Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists
DOCUMENT NAME: G:<COOIQDCC99004.DRP
- See previous concurrences
To receive a co
of this document, indicate In the box:
C = Co
wlo attach/end
E'
Co
wlattachlend
N" = No co
OFFICE
- RIII:DRP
- RillDRP
E
- RillEICS
N
Rill:D
DATE
Cobe /k'c
05/07/99
Ve el
05/07/99
Cla
on
05/07/99
Gro
05/
/ 9
OFFIC/AL RECORD COPY
R. Powers
Distribution:
RRB1 (E-Mail)
RPC (E-Mail)
OE:EA File
J. Lieberman, OE w/encl
D. Dambly, OGC w/encl
B. Boger, NRR w/encl
M. Banerjee, NRR w/encl
Project Mgr., NRR w/encl
J. Caldwell, Rill w/encl
B. Clayton, Rill w/encl
SRI D.C. Cook w/encl
DRP w/encl
DRS w/encl
Rill PRR w/encl
PUBLlC IE-01 w/encl
Docket File w/encl
GREENS
IEO (E-Mail)
DOCDESK (E-Mail)