ML20246P062

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards SSOMI Rept 50-219/88-203 on 881128-1216.Weaknesses Identified Involving Implementation of Existing Programs & Procedures.Number of Equipment Operability Concerns Remained to Be Resolved.Util 890112 Response Adequate
ML20246P062
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 03/16/1989
From: Lainas G
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Fitzpatrick E
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
Shared Package
ML20246P069 List:
References
NUDOCS 8903280101
Download: ML20246P062 (6)


See also: IR 05000219/1988203

Text

p ucg

g

%

UNITED STATES

g

g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

5g

j

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

-

Q

  • g

March 16, 1989

i

Docket No. 50-219

Mr. E. E. Fitzpatrick

Vice President and Director

,

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Post Office Box 38a

Forked River, New Jersey 08731

Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick:

-

SUBJECT:

SAFETY SYSTEMS OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS INSPECTION AT OYSTER CREEK

NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - (INSPECTION REPORT 50-219/88-203)

This letter forwards the report and Executive Summary of the installation and

testing portion of the safety systems outage modifications inspection (SSOMI)-

conducted by the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation from November 28

through December 16, 1988. The operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear

Generating Station is authorized by NPC Operating License No. DPR-016. At the

l

conclusion of the inspection, the inspection team discussed the findings with

'

you and with other members of your staff identified in Appendix A of the

enclosed inspection report.

The purpose of the installation and test portion of the SS0MI was (1) to

determine, through an examination of specific work packages, that installation

of the selected modifications conformed to design and instal stion requirements

,

I

and (2) to verify that the repaired or modified components at:1 systems have the

required operating configurations and have been adequately tested to ensure

j

that they are capable of safely performing their intended functions.

The inspection team identified weaknesses involving the implementation of

I

existing programs and procedures.

Inadequate management attention had been

j

provided to ensure that activities directly related to the satisfactory

performance of safety-related work and maintenance were conducted in accordance

'

with approved procedures. Our primary concern was that the failure to

implement these procedures resulted in a degradation in the cleanliness of the

facility and had the potential to adversely affect the quality of maintenance

and modifications performed during the recent outage.

For example, the failure

!

I

to implement the controls for combustibles and housekeeping allowed the

condition of the facility to degrade.

In addition, the failure to revise the

administrative procedures for job orders following a major change in the method

l

of controlling work activities resulted in the performance of complex testing

I

and maintenance on the emergency diesel generator without prior engineering or

operations review and approval.

I

At the conclusion of the inspection, a number of equipment operability concerns

remained to be resolved.

In a letter dated December 23, 1988, we requested

that you expeditiously evaluate several of the inspection team's concerns.

,

l

These involved (1) core spray and containment spray system injection valve

O

t

8903280101 890316

I

i

PDR

ADOCK 05000219

(

O(

O

PDC

.

. . . . . . _ _ _ _

1

,

Mr. E. E. Fitzpatrick

-2-

March 16, 1989

stroke times in excess of design values, (2) grease contamination in Limitorque

motor-operated valves, (3) control room heating, ventilation and cooling system

flows less than design values, and (4) unapproved testing and maintenance

performed on emergency diesel generator No.1.

We have reviewed your response

dated January 12, 1989, and concluded that your evaluations and corrective

actions adequately resolved the concerns with the operability and reliability

of these systems. Although no formal response to this report is required, some

of the items identified by the inspection team may be potential enforcement

findings. Any enforcement actions will be identified by Region I in separate

correspondence.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosure

will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact

Mr. C. A. VanDenburgh (301-492-0965).

Sincerely,

Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director

Division of Reactor Projects - I/II

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1.

Executive Summary

2.

NRC Inspection Report 50-219/88-203

cc w/ enclosures: See next page

,

o

_

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

_

_

_ _ _

.

.

Mr, E. E. Fitzpatrick

-3-

March 16, 1989

cc w/ enclosures:

Ernest L. Blake, Jr.

Resident Inspector

Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge

c/o U.S. NRC

2300 N Street, NW

P. O. Box 445

Washington, DC 20037

Forked River, New Jersey. 08731

J. B. Liberman, Esquire

Consnissioner

Bishop, Liberman, Cook, et, al.

New Jersey Department of Energy

1155 Avenue of the Americas

101 Commerce Street

New York, New York 10036

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Regional Administrator, Region I

Jennifer Moon, Acting Chief

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

New Jersey Department of Environmental

745 Allendale Road

Protection

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406

Bureau of Nuclear Engineering

CN 415

BWR Licensing Manager

Trenton, New Jersey 08625

GPU Nuclear Corporation

1 Upper Pond Road

Parsipanny, New Jersey 07054

Deputy Attorney General

State of New Jersey

Department of Law and Public Safety

36 West State Street - CN 112

Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Mayor

Lacey Township

818 West Lacey Road

Forked River, New Jersey 08731

Licensing Manager

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Mail Stop: Site Emergency Building

P.O. Box 388

Forked River, New Jersey 08731

.

!

_

l M'

,

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

An installation 'and testing portion of a safety systems outage and modifica-

tions inspection (SS0MI) was performed at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating

Station during the period November 28 through December 16, 1988. The purpose

of the inspection was to determine whether the licensee properly implemented

i

' design, design control, procurement control, material control, and work control

systems to ensure that modifications being implemented during the current

outage conformed to design and installation requirements and that repaired,

modified, or newly installed components or systems were tested to ensure that

they were, or remained, capable of performing their intended safety functions.

i

The inspection team concluded that the craftsmanship of the work performed in

the modifications was of high quality.

The team identified several minor

hardware deficiencies, which resulted from not adhering to the installation

'

criteria provided in the modification packages; however, the licensee corrected

these deficiencies before the team's departure.

Increased management attention

)

is required to ensure that the installation criteria are properly implemented

'

(Section2.2.4).

The inspection team also concluded that the licensee provided insufficient

management attention to ensure the successful implementation of existing

programs and procedures for document adequacy and control, post-maintenance

testing, and general plant maintenance. These conclusions were based on the

following deficiencies.

The licensee inadequately controlled the work control process because the

implementing procedures had not been rev Q ed following the incorporation

of a computer-based work control system,

c 9 dition, the new system did

not incorporate equivalent requirements for post-maintenance testing

(Section 2.1.6).

As a result, complex maintenance and modifications

performed under the new system did not receive the same level of

engineering review and approval as was required under the old system

(Section 2.2.2).

The licensee inadequately evaluated the design basis for valve stroke

times during post-maintenance testing of core spray and containment spray

system valve modifications (Section 2.1.4).

The licensee inadequately evaluated the post-maintenance testing of the

control rcom ventilation system modification (Section 2.2.7).

The licensee inadequately implemented existing procedures for the control

oftransientcombustiblesandhousekeeping(Section2.2.8),exeting

- methods for craft identification of pre-existing deficient material

conditions (Section 2.1.4) and existing procedures for changing

quality assurance verification inspections (Sections 2.1.4 and 2.1.10).

The licensee inadequately implemented a previously identified corrective

action program for grease contamination of Limitorque motor-operated

valves (Section 2.2.3).

ES-1

\\

__-__-_-___ _ 0

\\

-

1

-

l

Mr. E.E. Fitzpatrick

-4-

i

a

Distribution

Docket File 50-219

DRIS R/F

RSIB R/F

PDR

LPDR

BGrimes

CHaughney

JDyer

Elmbro

'

JKonklin

!

CVanDenburgh

l

GHolahan

LSpessard

TMurley

JSniezek

SVarga

B00ger

ADromerick

JStolz

SNorris

i

MGallo, RI

'

JDurr, RI

CCowgill, RI

Inspection Team

l.

Regional Administrators

Regional Division Directors

Division Directors

IS Distribution

1

4

\\

\\

/d [

/l f

.,

0FC

RSIB:DRIS:NRR
RSIB:D 5;'RR :RSIB:
NRR :D:

IS-

NRR:PD14 i

F:NRR:ADRP

'

......:... ___ .. _____:.___

.. __:____.

_ _...:

. . ______:.____ _

_ L :.....________

.

k in

CJHat

l

s

AWD

ck

GMHolahan

NAME :CAVanDenburgh

JEV___________:.______..'.____:

...._________:._____________: ....___ ___

.:

.

,

3//j/89

03/p/89
03G/89
03//f/89
03/ /89

DATE :03/n /89

= _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

__

,

,v.

.

4

Mr. E. E. Fitzpatrick

-4-

March 16, 1989

Distribution

Docket File 50-219

DRIS R/F

RSIB R/F

PDR

LPDR

BGrimes

CHaughney

JDyer

Elmbro

JKonklin

CVanDenburgh

GHolahan

LSpessard

TMurley

JSniezek

SVarga

BBoger

ADromerick

JStolz

SNorris

MGallo, RI

JDurr, RI

CCowgill, RI

Inspection Team

Regional Administrators

Regional Division Directors

Division Directors

IS Distribution

GLainas

a

  • SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES

l

N-I/IT

UFC

RSIB:DRIS:NRR* : RS I B : DR I S : NRR* : RS I B : DRI S : NRR* : D : DRI S : h.F
NRR:PD14*

/ ....

______:....___________.:.__....... __.:._____________:______.___....:__......._____

NAME :CAVanDenburgh

JEKonklin
CJHaughney
BKGrimes
AWDromerick

Clai.

l

___ . : ______ ...__...: _____________:__ .... ______:..____________:___

l

.

i

DATE :03/13/89

03/13/89
03/13/89
03/13/89
03/14/89~
03/j /89

iJ

'/

\\ .,

i

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