ML20034F280
| ML20034F280 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1993 |
| From: | J. J. Barton GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034E974 | List: |
| References | |
| C321-93-2047, NUDOCS 9303020545 | |
| Download: ML20034F280 (2) | |
Text
- l ATTACHMENT.7 1
1 c
c tJ Nuclear n'o-" poration f-,
y GPU Nuclear Cor
-" a -"
Forked Alver, New Jersey o8731 oo9-971-4814 Jonn J. Barton Vice President and Director Oyster Creek February 5, 1993 i
C321-93-2047 Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Administrator Region 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, pA 19406 Ocar Mr. Martin:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 s
January 25, 1993 Degraded Shut Jown Cooling Event' On January 25, 1993, an event resulting in degraded shutdown cooling occurred at Oyster Creek.
This event was caused by an inadequate change to the-shutdewn cooling procedure.
As a result of reduced cooling effectiveness,
~~i coolant temperature exceeded the technical specification limit for the plant condition at the time.
In response to this event, we have initiated a-thorough review of the circumstances to determine cause,' significance and corrective actions.
In addition, the NRC. assigned an Augmented Inspection Team to investigate this event.
Three separate GPU Nuclear review groups are evaluating this event.
Corrective actions resulting from these reviews are both short and long-term actions depending upon the specific areas they address.
One of-the-areas that has been carefully looked at is the review process conducted for procedure changes.
The review process for procedure changes at Oyster Creek was established to ensure the adequacy of proposed changes.
A temporary change process"is in place to facilitate immediate changes to procedures when circumstances warrant' such a' change.
Currently, our procedure allows a more,1imited review for-temporary changes than the normal procedure change process..'This. temporary change process was utilized:to effect the change to the shutdown cooling procedure which resulted in degraded. cooling.- While.we believe that the:
primary cause of the inadequate change is an implementation failure, we.are concerned that the reduced level of review the temporary. change process allows -
may have resulted-in excessive reliance on its use. As a retult of our in-house review and discussions, we have concluded that this' process should be strengthened.
9303020545 930223 PDR ADOCK 05000219 O
PDR GPU Nuclear Corporahon is a subsidiary of GonwM Pubhc Utihties Corporation TN
>l3383 831SAO 38N R:80 26( 80. 831 OMO E69 609 -
i
r 3
3 A
C321-93-2047 Page 2 lhe temporary procedure change process currently evaluation is required.
In order to assure a thorough technical review of substantive temporary changes we will now perform a Responsible Technical Review prior to implementation of all substantive temporary changes wheth not a safety evaluation is required.
constitute one of the two management approvals.The Responsible Technical Reviewer ma Although our emphasis is in reducing the number of temporary changes, in t event a temporary change requires a safety evaluation, an Independent Safe Review will be performed prior to implementation in addition to the change reo" ired or unreviewed safety question involved. Res Review may be waived with the approval of the Director. Oyster CreekIndependent our current procedure requires an Independent Safety Review prior to While evaluate this requirement together with other aspects procedure change process and may revise this requirement in the future.
Manager, Safety Review has been directed to evaluate this process in order to The make recommendat f ons for future changes.
plan to adopt, based on these recommendations.We will inform you of changes we Personnel are being instructed to pursue procedure changes via the normal process in order to reduce the number of temporary changes.
Shift Su In addition, the changes.pervisors have been instructed to challenge the need for temporary Guidelines in this regard have been issued.
In conclusion, the primary cause was an inadequate proc implementation failure of the temporary change process.edure attributed to an above should reduce the number of temporary changes and strengthen the review The actions described process.
_rytrIgours,
/
0 hn J B ice r ident & Director Oyst r reek JJB/PC:je cc:
NRC, Document Control Desk Senior NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek NRC Project Manager i
1 i
10cl
>l3380 831SA0 OBH 87,:80 E6, 80 83:1 0640 E69 609
. -.