ML17346B147
| ML17346B147 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1985 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Williams J FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17346B148 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510150224 | |
| Download: ML17346B147 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000250/1985032
Text
~ 8 AfcIICg
0
co
-j~'i'
/f +**++
Docket Nos.
50-250
and 50-251
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
October 7,
1985
Power and Light Company
ATTN:
Mr. J.
W. Williams, Jr.
Group Vice President
Nuclear Energy Department
P. 0.
Box 14000
Juno Beach,
33408
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
SAFETY
PS
EM FUNCTIONAL INSPECTION
REPORT
50-250 85-3
- 50-251/85-32
This letter forwards the report of the Safety System Functional
Inspection
performed
by an
NRC team from August 26-30 and September
9-13,
1985 involving
activities authorized
by
NRC Operating
License
Nos.
DPR-31 and
DPR-41 for your
Turkey Point facility.
This inspection
was conducted jointly by members of
Region II and the Office of Inspection
and Enforcement,
by
NRC contractors,
and with assistance
of the two Resident
Inspectors.
At the conclusion of the
inspection,
the findings were discussed
at an exit meeting with those
members
of your staff identified in the appendix to the enclosed
inspection report.
This
NRC effort at Turkey Point represents
a
new inspection
approach
involving
an assessment
of the operational
readiness
and functions of a selected
safety
system.
Particular
attention is directed to the details of modifications
and
design control, quality of maintenance
and surveillance,
and adequacy of testing
applicable
to that safety system.
At Turkey Point, the team selected
the
system
as described
in the operating license.
The report included findings that may result in enforcement action,
which would
be the subject of subsequent
correspondence.
The report also addresses
other
observations
and conclusions
made
by the inspection
team.
Section II of the
report is
a
summary of the safety effects of the more significant findings
on the operational
readiness
of Turkey Point's auxiliary feedwater
system.
The inspection
team exit discussion with your staff was held on September
13,
1985.
On September
30,
1985 you submitted
a letter to the Regional Administrator,
Region II concerning
system
and the subject inspection.
The following summarizes
the Florida Power and Light (FPL) comments
and
NRC
staff responses:
FPL Coment:
Numerous positive steps,
involving FPL senior management,
ig
k
pg
d
1
1i
y
d
y<<
Turkey Point, which is
a system
shared
between
the two units of an early
generation
commercial nuclear
power plant.
--
8510150224-& 000250
'pR
ApOCK 05
ppR
8
'
0
j
L
Florida Power
8 Light Company
NRC Staff Res
onse:
NRC recognizes
the effort by FPL and the team
reviewed detai
s of the upgrade
program.
However, the team believes
a
number of the inspection
issues
should have
been identified by FPL and
incorporated into its upgrade
program.
2.
FPL Comment:
FPL has installed
a non-safety
grade
standby
system,
which employs
two motor-driven feedwater
pumps
and which provides
a capability in excess of the design
requirements
of the plant.
The
two pumps are provided with a backup, non-safety
grade diesel
generator
power supply.
NRC Staff Res onse:
The team determined at the time of the inspection
there were
no administrative controls or Technical Specification
requirements
in place to assure
the availability on demand of this
standby
system.
Consequently,
the
team concluded that it would be
inappropriate
to take into consideration
the capabilities of this
system during the team's
analysis of the inspection findings.
We
understand
that you recognize also the
need for administrative controls
over the standby feedwater
system
and that you have committed, in your
September
30,
1985 letter, to provide Technical Specification
requirements
to establish
those controls
needed
to ensure
system operability.
~ 'PL Comment:
A safety-related
nitrogen system is used
as
a backup to the
di
i <<p
<<h
ill y
d
flow control valves.
Control
room operators typically shift the flow
control valves
from automatic to manual
mode after an auxiliary feedwater
actuation.
With the flow control
va'I ves in manual
mode, the ni trogen
bleed
down rate decreases,
allowing in excess of 10 minutes for operator
action to valve in a standby nitrogen bottle.
This is in contrast
to the
6-7 minutes available if the flow control valves
remain in automatic.
NRC Staff Res onse:
As discussed
in section III.B.1 of the enclosed
inspection report, the team determined that it cannot
be assumed
that
control
room operators
would shift the flow control valves from automatic
to manual
mode within 6-7 minutes following an accident
because:
(1)
some operators
were trained to assume
they had 15-20 minutes
avai'lable to take action;
and (2) applicable
emergency
procedures
did
not include requirements
for the operators
to shift the flow control
valves to manual.
The Turkey Point facility has demonstrated
past
weaknesses
in the areas of
plant operations,
maintenance,
and quality assurance
programs.
These functional
areas
were rated Category
3 on your most recent Systematic
Assessment
of
Licensee
Performance
(SALP) (July 1, 1983-October
31, 1984); plant operations
was rated Category
3 in the previous
SALP as well.
As
a result of these
and
other identified concerns,
you implemented
a Performance
Enhancement
Program
t
(PEP) to improve regulatory
and operational
performance.
Despite this
additional
management
attention,
the inspection
team noted that performance
0.
0
Florida Power
8 Light Company
in the functional areas
of maintenance,
surveillance testing,
and design
changes
and modifications
has not markedly improved.
The lack of timely
resolution of these
concerns
has also
been
documented
in recent
NRC Region
II inspection reports.
You should, therefore,
review and evaluate
weaknesses
identified in the enclosed
report and take appropriate
actions to improve
management
controls over licensed activities.
Further, you should consider
whether similar weaknesses
apply to the operations
and functions of other
Turkey Point safety systems.
NRC staff understands
that subsequent
to the inspection exit meeting,
you
took prompt action to update
procedures
and training to address
the team's
safety concerns.
However,
we request that you respond to this office with
your further actions resulting from this inspection within 60 days of the
date of this report.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Inspection
Report Nos.
50-250/85-32
and 50-251/85-32
cc w/enclosure:
Mr. C.
M. Wethey, Vice President
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
Mr. C. J. Baker, Plant Manager
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
DISTRIBUTION:
ORPB Reading
DI Reading
NRC
Local
WJDircks
JMTayl or
RHVollmer
JGPartlow
RLSpessard
PFMcKee
LJCallan
JNGrace,
Region II
SAElrod, Region II
DGMcDonald,
James
M. Taylor, Director
Office of Inspection
and Enforcement
IE:
IE:
I
LJCa lan:esp
JGP
tlow
10/ $ /85
10/y/85
I
JM
lo
WJDircks
10 p/85
10/g /85
e
I a
<<I
4 <<[
I'4$
I
f<<IfI
VV .'t fl '
ar<<I
r
If
P I,
a
I I"
<>
I,
'
t'I I',
.
It I
I
~
W
t'
I'lf I " 'a
'I'),"
AI
ff <>>
I
It I
'a,II<<I tJ <<I
4
,44
I,
,
~
fIA I
4 ~ r
4
at
I
ta ~-'a,
4
1
t
I
C
4
a<< It
II
III
It
~
'I a
~
4 tr
fI
lfc
~<<
I
a
4
If
~ .
.Iffl
AIN,
'ag,t
$
I
r.ry ', t,a
a
1 ~
I
f
a'la
I ~
II