ML20127D831

Forwards Insp Rept 50-336/92-22 on 920706-24,0909-11 & 1109-17 & Notice of Violation.Informs That Enforcement Conference for Violation Re Possible Failure to Take Action to Design Discrepancies Will Be Scheduled for Jan or Feb

ML20127D831
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	01/11/1993
From:	Hodges M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Opeka J NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO.
Shared Package
ML20127D837	List: IR 05000336/1992022 ML20127D831 ML20127D845
References
EA-92-146, NUDOCS 9301190060
Download: ML20127D831 (3)

See also: IR 05000336/1992022

Text

.

1

' D LC,

2

i

JAN 11 1933

Docket No. 50-336 License No. DPR-65

EA 92-146

Mr. John F. Opeka

Executive Vice President - Nuclear

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company

P. O. Box 270

Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0-270

Dear Mr. Opeka:

SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-336/92-22 MILLSTONE UNIT 2

This refers to the safety inspection conducted by Mr. Ram .Bhatia and others of this office on ,

July 6 through July 24,1992 and subsequent re-inspections on September 9-11 and

November 9-17,1992. These inspections focused on circumstances surrounding the

July 6,1992, partial loss of normal power and subsequent spent fuel pool draindown event

and existing design questions for your Millstone Unit 2 facility in Waterford, Connecticut.

At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with Mr. M. Wilson,

Nuclear Licensing Supervisor, and those members of your staff identified in the enclosed

report. In addition, a telephone exit was conducted on January 6,1993, by Mr. J. Beall and

others of this office with Mr. J, Keenan and other members of your staff.

This inspection was directed toward areas important to public health and safety. Within

these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examination of procedures, plant design

change records, design documentation,125 Vac and de distribution systems, relevant

separation and fire hazard analyses, as-installed equipment, interviews with personnel, and

observations by the inspectors.

Based upon the results of this inspection, two apparent violations were identiGed. The first

violation is as set forth in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A. Also,

several design concerns were identified by your staff and confirmed by the. inspectors.

Certain safety-related system functions would not have worked as designed, assuming a

single failure of a de bus. To help the NRC better understand the generic implications of the

design flaws, we held a meeting in NRC Headquarters on October 21,1992. We found the

meeting helpful. Your staff and contractors have continued to look for other design flaws of

your engineered safeguards actuation system. We understand that you developed and took

appropriate corrective actions for all the identified problems prior to unit restart.

9301190060 930111

FDR ADOCK 05000336

O PDR-

164

Ut

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

JAN 11 in)

-

Mr. John F. Opeka 2

The second item was an apparent violation that is being (onsidered for escalated enforcement

action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC

linforcement Actions" (linforcement Policy),10 CFR Part 2 Appendix C (1992). The

apparent violation oncerns the possible failure to promptly take ..dion to correct single

failure design discrepancies ideitified by your staff. Accedingly, no Notice of Violation is

presently being issued for this inspection finding. In addition, please be advised that the

number and characterization of apparent violations dekribed in the er. closed inspection report

may change after further NRC review.

An enforcement conference to discuss th'.s apparent violation will be scheduled for the late

January or early February. The purloses ol this conference are to discuss the apparent

violation, its cause and safety significance; to provide you tbc opportunity to point out any

errots in our inspection report; to provide an opportunity for you to present your proposed

corrective action; and to discuss any other information that will help us determine the

appropriate enforcement action in accordance with the linforcement Policy. You will be

advised by separate correspondence of the rescits of our deliberations on this matter. No

response regardint 'he apparent violation is required at this time.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and

its enclosuu will be placed in '.ne NRC Pablic Document Room.

The reS>onses direewd by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance

proccdures of the Office of Management and lludget as required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1980, Pub. L. No. 96.511.

We appreciate your cooperation.

. Sincerely, _

,

O dn:1 cimma ng

I.'.3rvm W. Ucqns

Marvin W. Hodges, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

linclosure:

1. Appendix A, Notice of Violation

2. NRC Ins;ection Report 50-336/92-22

..

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _. ,

.

JAft 11 1993

?

Mr. John F. Opeka 3 .

cc w/ encl:

W. D. Romberg, Vice President - Nuclear, Operations Services ,

S. E. Scace, Vice President - Milhtone Nuclear Power Station

J. S. Keenan, Nuclear Unit Director

R. M. Kacich, Director, Nuclear Licensing

D. O. Nordquist, Director of Quality Services .

Gerald Gar 5cid, Esauire

Nicholas Reynolds, Esquire

K. Abraham, PAO (2)

Public Document Room (PDR)

Local Public Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident inspector

State of Connecticut SLO Designee

bec w/ encl:

Region 1 Docket Room (with concurrences)

DRS/EB SALP Coordinator

M. Ilodges, DRS

W. Lanning, DRS

R. Capra, NRR

R.111ough, DRP

L. Doerflein, DRP

P. Swetland, SRI, Millstone

W. Raymond, SRI, Haddam Neck

V. McKee, OEDO

G. Vissing, PM, NRR

R. Barkley, DRP

,

1Ri. mS ( m DRP m:DRS -

Ri.DRS

ng,a ga niough Durr

g

1/ef/93 < 1 693 1/h93 1/7/93 jfp/fy

yf

,fg .

tb

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

j' ,

A:MSMESS

. 4p/p/y p-

r j

- . _ _ - . .