ML20128P615
| ML20128P615 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1990 |
| From: | Collins S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Gates W OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128P618 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9610180027 | |
| Download: ML20128P615 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000285/1990020
Text
.
.-.
. -
-
.. . .
.
..
.
- -
. - .
.--
/f"
'
UNITED STATES
,
r s.
i*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
!,
.<
q
'
-
.
- i
\\,
j
REGloN IV
4
Sb
d
611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SulTE 1000
%> , ,] , /
ARUNGTON. TEX AS 76011
OCT 31 1990
Docket No. 50-285/90-20
License No. DPR-40
Omaha Public Power District
ATTN:
W. G. Gates, Division Manager
Nuclear Operations
444 South 16th Street Mall
Omaha, Nebraska 68102-2247
Gentlemen:
SUCJECT:
(NRC INSPECTION REPCRT NO. 50-285/90-20)
This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) special team inspection
conducted from Au
20-31. 1990, of activities authorized for the Fort
CalhounStation(gustFCS). At the conclusion of the inspection, the finding
discussed with you and other members of your staff.
This inspection was performed to ascertain if your emergency operating
procedures (E0Ps) were technically accurate; if their specified actions could
be meaningfully accomplished using existing equipment, controls, and
instruments; and if the available procedures had the usability necessary to
provide the operators with an effective operating tool. The areas examined
during the inspection are identified in the enclosed report. Within these
areas, the inspection team examined selective procedures and representative
records, conducted plant walkdowns, interviewed personnel, and observed the use
of E0Ps on the FCS plant-specific simulator.
.: 3,
'.
The team det, ermined that the E0Ps, when used by the standard complement of
4
trained operat6rs, could preclude serious damage to plant systems, mitigate
accident events, and place the plant in a safe shutdown condition. However,
the team qu.estioned the ability of the operating crew to perform E0P actions }
effectively under the minimal staffing requirements of the Technical
j
Specifications.
In addition, the team concluded that the licensee's
4
verification and validation efforts for the current E0Ps were inadequate.
l
There were several inconsistencies in the procedures, omission of important:
-
operator-action instructions, and errors between procedure action steps and
in-plant component designations. Other weaknesses in the E0P program are
$c:
discussed in the report.
EoS
Based on the results of this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to
oo
5@
be in violation of NRC recuirements, as specified in the enclosed Notice of
D' O
' Violation. We are concerned about the violation because it involved the
failure to establish and maintain appropriate emergency operating procedures.
Ne
@a
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions
,
@C
specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response.
In your
g
response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional
35
gI '
- 10002
deh/c MWc
i i
,
. - ,
..
. _
- - -
.
.
.
.
-.
__
-
.
- maha Public Power District
-2-
actions you plan to prevent recurrence. Af ter reviewing your response to this
Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future
inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is
necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
During the course of the inspection, you and other members of your staff made
consnitments regarding immediate and long-term actions you would implement to
resolve some of the concerns identified by the inspection team.
These commit-
ments were discussed with you during the exit interview and during subsequent
telephone conversations and are sumarized in paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 of the
enclosed report.
In your letter of October 1,1990, you delineated your
imediate conunitments to address our concerns.
If our characterization of your
commitments is correct, no additional statement of these commitments, on your
part, is required.
If, hcwever, we have failed to correctly articulate your
commitments, please provide clarification of your commitments as part of your
response to the Notice of Violation.
We are concerned that you and your staff had received ample notice of the
types of concerns identified by inspections at other facilities, the NRC
inspection team identified a significant number of weaknesses that could have
been avoided had the available, lessons-learned been applied.
The response directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice is not subject
to the clearance procedures of the Office of lianagement and Budget as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Should you have any questions concernir.g this letter, please contact us.
Sincerely,
'?-f
h
Samuel J. Collins, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A - Notice of Violation
E.
Appe'ndif B - NRC Inspection Report
50-285/90-20 w/ attachments
cc w/ enclosures:
leBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae
ATTN: Harry H. Voigt, Esq.
1333 New Hampshire Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C.
20036
s
_
>
.
_ _ .
.
_ _ _ . _ _ _.._
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_
.
.
- . _ .
. - _ .
e
Omaha Public Power District
-3-
.
't
Washington County Board
of Supervisors
ATTN: Jack Jensen, Chairman
Blair, Nebraska 68008
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
ATTH: Charles B. Brinkman, Manager
Washington Nuclear Operations
12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Nebraska Department of Health
ATTN: Harold Borchert, Director
Division of Radiological Health
301 Centennial Mall, South
2
P.O. Box 95007
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509
Fort Calhoun Station
ATTN:
T. L. Patterson, Manager-
P.O. Box 399
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
ATTH:
Resident Inspector
P.O. Box 309
>
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023
,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
ATTN: Regional Administrator, Region IV
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000
Arlington, Texas 76011
,
T
.