ML20204F694
| ML20204F694 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1986 |
| From: | Starostecki R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Lydon J BOSTON EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204F697 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8608040282 | |
| Download: ML20204F694 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000293/1986014
Text
-
,
.
.
,
.
JUL 3 01986
Docket No. 50-293
Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear
ATTN: Mr. James M. Lydon
Chief Operating Officer
800 Boylston Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection Report No. 50-293/86-14
This letter refers to the routine safety inspection (50-293/86-14) conducted by
Dr. M. McBride of this office on April 28, 1986 to June 2, 1986 at the Pilgrim
Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, Massachusetts. Dr. M. McBride discussed the
findings of the inspection with Mr. A. Pederson and other members of your staff
periodically during the inspection and at the conclusion of the inspection.
The NRC Region I Inspection Report is enclosed with this letter.
Based on the results of this inspection, it appears that some of your activi-
ties were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set forth
in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A.
The two viola-
tions cited have been categorized by severity level in accordance with the
revised NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR 2, Appendix C) published in the Federal
Register Notice (49 FR 8583) dated March 8,1984.
In accordance with NRC
regulations 10 CFR 2.201 you are required to respond to this letter within
20 days of its receipt.
There are two problems noted in the enclosed report which in our view reflect
historical weaknesses. One problem deals with inadequate engineering evalua-
tion and the other with the role of the Quality Assurance (QA) Department.
Regarding the QA issue (reference page 12), the matter involves the lack of
management initiative to resolve in a timely manner QA-identified issues.
Engineering and Operations' managers and staff did not respond to these issues,
even after status reports indicating that they were overdue were written by
QA to the Vice-President and Senior Vice-President levels.
It was not
until the new plant manager became involved that senior managers acted to re-
solve the conflict with QA. Consequently, it is of concern to us that there
may be a lack of appreciation on the part of some elements of your organization
as to the role of the QA staff. Although in this case the new plant manager was
eventually able to get this resolved, higher levels of company management had
the opportunity but did not avail themselves of it.
In response to the
enclosed notice of violation, please describe in sufficient detail how your
corrective actions will be sufficiently broad to address the matter beyond
the specific item cited.
The issue dealing with inadequate engineering evaluations (reference page 2)
highlights inadequacies in the preparation of a safety evaluation prepared in
1985.
In particular, there were indications in the form of written guidance
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
IR PILGRIM 86-14 - 0001.0.0
8608040202 e60730
l{g
ADOCK 05
23
gDR
-
. .
.
,
_
.,
.,
.
'
Boston Edison Company
1
M/C Nuclear
from industry and NRC that specific electrical components had deficiencies
warranting replacement.
The technical basis p epared by the engineering staff
was inadequate; although the evaluation claimed no failures had occurred at
Pilgrim, the operators routinely cautioned plant staff working in the vicinity
that these devices were sensitive to vibration and could activate.
This leads
us to conclude that the operational feedback was weak in that this caution was
not documented. Consequently, there are two underlying issues that need to be
addressed as a result of this unresolved item:
inadequacies in the preparation
of safety evaluations and lack of communications between BECO staff.
The responses directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not
subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Sincerely,
Origina1 Signed By:
Richard W. Starostecki, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A. Notice of Violation
2.
NRC Region ! Inspection Report No. 50-293/86-14
cc w/encls:
L. Oxsen, Vice President, Nuclear Operations
A. Pedersen, Station Manager
Paul Levy, Chairman, Department of Public Utilities
Chairman, Board of Selectmen
J. D. Keyes
Plymouth Civil Defense Director
Senator Edward P. Kirby
The Honorable Peter V. Forman
Sharon Pollard
Public Document Room (POR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2)
.
.
- - -
.
- -
-
.
.
.
,
.
Boston Edison Company
2
M/C Nuclear
The responses directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not
si.) ject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
MLLmatt'eNppre
Sincerely,
Original Signed ByI
l
Richard W. Starostecki, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosures:
1,
Appendix A. Notice of Violatian
2.
NRC Region I Inspection Report No. 50-293/86-14
cc w/encls:
L. Oxsen, Vice President, Nuclear Operations
A. Pedersen, Station Manager
Paul Levy, Chairman, Department of Public Utilities
Chairman, Board of Selectmen
J. D. Keyes
Plymouth Civil Defense Director
Senator Edward P. Kirby
The Honorable Peter V. Forman
Public Document Room (PDR)
local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2)
bec w/ encl:
Region 1 Docket Room (with concurrences)
Management Assistant, DRMA (w/o enc 1)
DRP Section Chief
W. Raymond, SRI, Vermont Yankee
T. Shedlosky, SRI, Millstone 1&2
k.g
H. Eichenholz, SRI, Yankee
$r
p/
9p
P. Leech, LPM, NRR
L. Doerflein
/
'
.
,
/
R. fuhrmeister
i
/
-
k'
R[:DRP
$
RI:DRP
P
R:
P
McBride/geb
Strosnider
Kister
Starostecki
9p7/L/86
7/ 1/86
7/N86
7h86
1
4