ML18068A414
| ML18068A414 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1998 |
| From: | Thomas J. Palmisano CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 50-255-97-14, NUDOCS 9808310283 | |
| Download: ML18068A414 (5) | |
Text
~~~~----~
Consumers Energy~
A CMS Energy Company August 26, 1998 Director, Office of Enforcement US Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike
- Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Palisades Nuclear Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert. Ml 49043 DOCKET 50-255 - LICENSE DPR PALISADES PLANT Tel: 616 164 2296 Fax: 616164 2425
,,,,,,,,.. J. l'almlNao Site Vice President REVISED REPLY TO ONE NOTICE OF VIOLATION IDENTIFIED IN NRC SPECIAL INSPECTION REPORT 50-255/97-014(DRS)
NRC Inspection Report 97-014 dated April 2, 1998, identified six violations associated with an event on October 17, 1997. The Consumers Energy Company response to those violations was provided in a letter dated May 4, 1998. In that letter, the response to violation number one (01013) stated that we agreed with the violation although additional fact finding was still ongoing. That additional fact finding has now been completed; as a result we have concluded that a minor revision should be made to that response. The purpose of this letter is to provide the revised response to violation number one. provides the revised response to violation number one. Revisions from the original response are identified.with a change bar in the page margin.
SUMMARY
OF COMMITMENTS This letter contains no new commitments and no revisions to existing commitments.
' }
I ; I T~~
Site Vice President CC Administrator, Region Ill, USNRC Project Manager, NRR, USNRC NRC Resident Inspector - Palisades Attachment 9808310283 980826 PDR ADOCK 05000255
<i PDR
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY To the best of my knowledge, the contents of this document entitled "Revised Reply To One Notice Of Violation Identified In NRC Special Inspection Report 50-255/97-014(DRS)", are truthful and complete.
-1//~
By Thomas J. Palmisano Site Vice President Sworn and subscribed to before me this ;)l.D 4-h day of ~
~~ta~
Berrien County, Michigan (Acting in Van Buren County, Michigan)
My commission expires February 16, 2000
,1998.
[SEAL]
ATTACHMENT 1
~ONSUMERSENERGYCOMPANY PALISADES PLANT
. DOCKET 50-255 REVISED REPLY TO ONE NOTICE OF VIOLATION IDENTIFIED IN NRC SPECIAL INSPECTION REPORT 50-255/97-014(DRS) 2 Pages
NRC NOTICE OF VIOLATION 1 Administrative Procedure 4. 00 (Revision 20 "'. 7118197), "Operations Organization, Responsibilities and Conduct," a procedure required by Section 1.b of RG 1.33, at Step 4.2.3.b.6, required that the Control Room Supervisor shall keep the Shift Supervisor informed of plant and equipment status.
Contrary to the above, on October 17, 1997, the Control Room Supervisor failed to properly implement Administrative Procedure 4. 00 in that the Shift Supervisor was not kept informed that power would be removed from all of the control rod drive motors in order to facilitate maintenance on control rod 38. (01013)
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY REPLY TO VIOLATION 1 Consumers Energy agrees with this violation with one clarification.
From Consumers Energy's initial investigation of the event, the investigation team concluded that the Control Room Supervisor had not informed the Shift Supervisor that power would be removed from all control rod drive motors. This conclusion was communicated to NRC inspectors who, in turn, conveyed this understanding in the inspection report. Additional fact finding has shown that this initial conclusion was in error. The Control Room Supervisor did inform the Shift Supervisor during a brief conversation that power would be removed from all control rod drive motors due to a concern about worker safety. However, the Shift Supervisor did not recognize that this statement was in conflict with his prior understanding that power would be removed only from rod 38. The Shift Supervisor became cognizant that power had been removed from all control rods only after he observed the removal of other rod drive motor contactors in addition to the contactor for rod 38.
This clarification is provided solely to correct the information on the docket. The
- remaining sections of the original violation response, including the Reason for Violation, are unchanged. For convenience, the remainder of the original violation response is reprinted below.
Reason for Violation
- -- - -~ - - ----
There was inadequate communication between the Shift Supervisor and the Control Room Supervisor.
1
Corrective Steps Taken and Results Achieved
- 1.
Plant management reviewed the event and suspended the "A" shift licensed operators from licensed duties until remedial activities were completed and documented. Remedial actions included reinforcement of expectations for keeping the Shift Supervisor informed of plant and equipment status.
- 2.
The Operations Superintendent briefed all operating crews on the expectations for effective shift communications, emergent work planning, and verification of proper Technical Specifications implementation.
- 3.
The Operations Department developed a lessons learned package whichwas used by each Shift Supervisor to brief his crew. The package covered the event in detail, identifying each point at which an opportunity to avoid problems using already established procedures was missed. Subjects discussed included the leadership role which must be assumed by the Shift Supervisor for emergent maintenance activities.
- 4.
A strategy was developed in the Palisades Five Year Plan to manage a human performance improvement initiative. Stand-down meetings have been conducted by all departments to train on human behaviors which will promote improved performance. The strategy includes continuing training and reinforcement on this subject in the future. This action addresses the underlying root causes relating to the need for improving human performance and questioning behaviors.
As a result of actions taken, crews have become more consistent in keeping the Shift Supervisor informed and involved with Technical Specification issues. Occasionally, however, situations continue to be observed which indicate that further improvements in crew communications with the Shift Supervisor are warranted. Action is ongoing to reinforce management expectations for Shift Supervisor involvement in the resolution of important issues.
Corrective Actions Remaining to Avoid Further Violations Each of the described actions has been completed.
Date by Which Full Compliance Will Be Achieved The pJantis __ currently in full compliance.
2