ML20012C330
| ML20012C330 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1990 |
| From: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Sylvia B DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20012C331 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9003210045 | |
| Download: ML20012C330 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000341/1989034
Text
my
,
.,
,
I
'
My
,
h
MAR 0 91993
Docket No. 50-341
The Detroit Edison Company
ATTN:
B. Ralph Sylvia,
Senior Vice President
Nuclear Operations
6400 North Dixie Highway
,.
U
Newport, MI 48166
Gentlemen:
This refers to the routine safety inspection conducted by Messrs. W. G. Rogers,
S. Stasek, D. Schrum, M. Farber, P. Moore and P. Byron of this office on
November 29, 1989 to January 8,1990, of activities at Fermi 2 authorized by
Facility Operating License No. NPF-43 and to the discussion of our findings
-
with you and members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during
the inspection.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective
examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and
interviews with personnel.
During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in violation
of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Notice.
A written response
is required.
Our assessment of your licensed activities during the recovery from the outage
and return to power operations indicates that some organizational coordination
problems existed and that those and other problems contributed to a decline in
performance.
Given your generally good performance for the early part of the
outage and the successful operations which preceded it, recent performance has
been disappointing.
The findings in this report indicate to us that the staff
may not have been mentally prepared for restart as evidenced by a lack of
attention to detail and an absence of ownership of systems.
There were also
issues identified involving first line supervision.
This report identifies both strengths and weaknesses.
For example, there were
several strong points which we observed:
during the period immediately preceding
and following the reactor startup, control room activities were generally orderly
and organized; a shift supervisor may have prevented an unnecessary reactor
shutdown by alertly questioning some data he received; another shif t supervisor
showed an excellent safety attitude by conservatively scramming the reactor
because of a small fire in the lagging of the main generator; and the
Independent Safety and Engineering Group, although strained for resources,
was an asset to the plant's self-assessment capability.
- .no n 1004i, wngaM,1
u a.nnaA
pt s
- mar
qe
w
o
I
'
_ .
y
v -
- - - - .
- - -
--
-
=
-
_
,
r
r.
,
,
o lg,f . ' '
,
,
.
.
y4
. t.The Detroit Edison Company
2
g gg
~
.
' Examples:of weaknesses included weak administrative controls which resulted
!
o
, in failure to complete. required documents, some missed surveillances, equipment:
i
itagging violations, improperly completed maintenance,-'and Limiting Condition
.;
>
for Operation tracking problems.
Further,~ in maintenance there was a need for
'
,
. improved planning and scheduling, better maintenance,~ engineering, and' operations
'
s
'
F.
coordination, improved documentation and turnover of' troubleshooting efforts,
and better knowledge and understanding of' systems._ The apparentslack of~
.
attention,to detail for power operation, once-out of the refuelin~g outage,
_
- led to. numerous personnel errors; including one reactor scram. iMost of these -
'
.
. concerns were discussed.at our most recent management = meetin'g 'and we- are aware
'
of the corrective. actions you have developed as part of your, Accountability-
Action. Plan.iWe will continue to monitor your progress;and. evaluate the
s * m
effectiveness of your actions. .As such, no written response:regarding these
specific; issues is necessary.
_
t
1+ ~
'In'accordancewith10CFR2.790oftheCommission's' regulations,ac5pyof-
- this letter and the enclosed . inspection report'will .be placed in the NRC
l
J
Public Document ~ Room,
f
- ..
-
'
"
.
,
. .
-
,
- We will gladly; discuss any questions you have concerning this , inspection.4
.
.
.
Sincerely,
s
,
3
,
-
DrIgInnI signed by El G. CFoohmari . -
t
'
Edward' G. Gree' man, Director '
'
n
Divisionof. Reactor. Projects
v
'
'"
Enclosures:
1.
2. : Inspection Report
.
- No. 50-341/89034(DRP)
,
.
cc w/ enclosures:
D. R.;Gipson,.P1 ant Manager
Patricia Anthony,< Licensing
'
-
.P. A. Marquardt, Corporate
Legal Department
'DCD/DCB~(RIDS)'
-
Licensing Fee Management Branch
Resident Inspector, RIII.-
LJames-R.~Padgett
-
Michigan'Public Service
<
Commission.
Harry H.:Voight, Esq.
Michigan Department of
Public Health
/
, Monroe. County Office of
'.
g
-Civil Preparedness
f
A
R
RI
RI I
RIII
11
'
.
19-
s
r/kjc
~De ayette
son
Creed
Gr6cnman
1,0
Sl119. 0
.
q'