ML20151H667

Discusses IE Insp on 821130-1231 & Forwards Notice of Violation & Notice of Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty

ML20151H667
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	04/12/1983
From:	Allan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:	Pollock M LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
Shared Package
ML20151H663	List: ML20151H661 ML20151H667 ML20151H677
References
EA-83-020, EA-83-20, NUDOCS 8305040785
Download: ML20151H667 (3)

Text

. -

q

/yun na 'o, UNITED STATES

! 'y. , y } NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 g "), 5 I REGION I 8,

• st p ' ,[ M1 PARK AVENUE

% . . . . . ,'f KING oF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 1e406 Docket No. 50-322 APR 121983 EA 83-20 Long Island Lighting Company ATTN: Mr. M. S. Pollock Vice President Nuclear 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Gentlemen:

Subject:

Inspection No. 50-322/82-35 This refers to the NRC inspection conducted between November 30 and December 31, 1982 at the Long Island Lighting Company's (LILCO) Shoreham Nuclear Station, Shoreham, New York, of activities authorized by NRC Con-struction Permit No. CPPR-95. The report of this inspection was forwarded to -

you on February 24, 1983. You have provided us a written reply to this report SNRC-859 dated March 16, 1983. During the 1.1spection, a violation of NRC requirements was identified involving inadequate review and approval of the results of a preoperational test of a diesel generator. This violation was discussed during a management meeting held with you and other members of your staff on January 25, 1983, at an enforcement conference held on March 24, 1983, and during a subsequent phone conversation' cn March 25, 1983 between Messrs. J. Allan and E. Greenman of Region I and yourself.

This violation, which is desgribed in the attached Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice), involved the performance of a preoperational test of a diesel generator in which the test results indicated that one of the test requirements was not satisfied. Furthermore LILCO personnel approved the recults despite the fact that the test criterion was not satisfied.

l The Test Engineer, Lead Startup Engineer, Startup Manager, and Joint Test l Group all approved the test results during the preoperational testing review process. Additionally, an Operational Quality Assurance (0QA) inspector witnessed the test and signed the test documentation. A second OQA inspector signed the test documentation accepting the results. The approval'of the results of a test performed to confirm a safety system's capability of meeting design safety requirements, when, in fact, test .results presented to the Joint -

Test Group (JTG) have not satisfied all requirements, is of significant concern to the NRC.

We recognize that high speed chart recorder data traces were taken during por-tions of the two-nour load test run. However, these recorder traces were not specifically addressed in the test acceptance criterion and were not reviewed by the JTG. Additionally, our review indicates that these traces show that portions of the test were run at generator load values less than the minimum specified by procedure.

CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

( 9305040785 830425 PDR ADDCK, 05000322 G PDR

Long Island Lighting Company 2 We also recognize that at the time of our inspection, additional audit / reviews of the completed test results by Cperational Quality Assurance (0QA) and the -

Review of Operations Committee (ROC) had not been performed. It is not clear to us, however, that these additional audit / reviews would hav'e identified 'the' problems. For example, the Chairman of the JTG, which approved the test data, also serves as Chairman of the ROC, and OQA personnel had previously reviewed and signed the test procedure.

During meetings held on January 25, March 24, 1983 and during a phone conver-sation on March 25, 1983, we discussed our concerns with you regarding this violation. We have reviewed your written response and corrective actions',

documented in letter SNRC-859 which discusses, in part, the issues noted above. Based on the evaluations conducted by you to date, you conclude that the circumstances discussed in inspection report 82-35 are an isolated instance.

We also note your commitment to the NRC Senior Resident Inspector to reperform electrical preoperational testing.of Diesel Generator 102 prior to. fuel load.

Additionally, as a. result of NRC inquiries into diesel generator problems

noted during inspection 83-07, LILCO has conducted additional evaluations and, in response to NRC concerns, is developing a reliability program for the diesel. generators. These actions are subject to review by Region I.

While we have considered the above remedial actions, the diesel generator testing violation demonstrates a . lack of aggressiveness on the part of LILCO to pursue, identify and resolve associatWd problems that can affect the reli-ability of the diesel generators, including attention to detail during per-formance, data review, and approval of the test results sof your preoperational test program. These actions are necessary to demonstrata lhat the compcnents will perform satisfactortly in service. , " '

In order to emphasize the need for more attention to' detail during review and, approval of test results, I have been authorized, after consultation with the l Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, to issue the attached i

Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penaity in the amountio f Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000) for the violation descrited'in The attached Notice. This violation has been classified at Severity Level 'III in accordance with Section C.2 of Supplement II of the NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR part 2, Appendix C), published in the Feceral Register,147 FR 9987 (March 9,1932).

You are required to rescond to'the attached Notice'an,d should follow the in-structions specified therein when preparing your-r3spcase. In your, response, you should indicate the specific actions that you have taken, or will take, to assure that preoperational test results are adequately reviewed, and that approval of results is given only after adequate review. Your reply to this i letter and the results of ' future inspections will be considered in determining I whether further enforcement is appropriate. v fn accordance with 10 CFR.2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure l will be placed in the NRC Oublic Document Room.

• t l -

k

__. , . _ _ , _ . , . - - - - - - - . . - - .1 --- - - - -- , - - - - - - ~ - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ' ' - ' ' - * ' " - " ~ - - - ' - * - - ~ - ~ * " ' " " - "

,~- .

s Long Island Lighting Company 3 The responses directdd by this letter and the attached Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget, otherwise required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of'1980, PL 96-511.

Sincerely,

\l s ,

n b J 81

,' es M. Allan 1 Acting Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty cc w/encis: '.

J. Rivello, Plant Manager J. L. Smith, Manager of Special Projects Edward ~M. Barrett, Esq.

Jeffrey L. Futter, Esq.

I. F. Gerecke, Manager, QA Department L. Brenner, ASLB J. Carpenter, ASLB I- ,

P. Morris, ASLB Public Document Room (PDR)

Local Public Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident Inspector State of New York Director, Power Division, PSC Shoreham Hearing Service List ,

i l

i

\

_ . . _ _ _ -