ML20249B078
| ML20249B078 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1998 |
| From: | Lanning W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Bowling M NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20249B079 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-423-97-82, EA-98-293, NUDOCS 9806220044 | |
| Download: ML20249B078 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000423/1997082
Text
-_ _
_-_
-
June 11,1998
EA 98-293
Mr. M. L. Bowling, Recovery Officer - Technical Services
C/O Ms. P. A. Loftus, Director - Regulatory
Affairs for Millstone Station
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
PO Box 128
Waterford, CT 06385
Dear Mr. Bowling:
SUBJECT:
NRC TEAM INSPECTION 50-423/97-82 and NOTICE OF VIOLATION
On February 26,1998,the NRC completed a team inspection of the Northeast Utilities
(NU) controls in identifying, resolving and preventing issues that degrade the quality of
plant operatic 80 or safety at Millstone Unit 3. The enclosed report presents the results of
that inspection.
This team inspection was performed onsite from February 9 through February 20,1998,
using NRC Inspection Procedure 40500, " Effectiveness of Licensee Controls in Identifying,
Resolving and Preventing Problems." Overall, the team found evidence of improving
performance. The corrective action program is adequate to suppurt restart, but it is clear
that the program will continue to require careful monitoring by NU management to ensure
sustained performance. Self-assessments were typically of high quality. The quality
l
assurance and quality control functions of the Nuclear Oversight organization have
improved as a direct result of improved staffing, qualifications, and knowledge level. Of
)
note is the Nuclear Oversight Restart Verification Assessment, which the team considered
to be a strong initiative. All three safety review committees (Nuclear Safety Assessment
Board, Site Operations Review Committee, and Plant Operations Review Committee)
operated effectively and provided quality input in addressing the issues before them. The
j
team also noted that the Independent Safety Engineering Group has made considerable
{
progress, albeit at the expense of performing safety reviews, in reducing the backlog of
'
operating experience (OE) reviews. The team found that management communications
methods with the plant staff were a strength. The plant staff feels that management is
receptive to problems brought forward and individuals generally characterized the
,
I
environment as improved and currently receptive to problem identification.
Nonetheless, our inspection identified six violations of NRC requirements. The first two
violations involve examples of inappropriate corrective actions: failure to take corrective
actions for recurrent problems with the boric acid transfer pumps and failing to complete all
l
of the work specified in an automated work order for modifications to service water flow
instrurnentation. The third violation concerns failing to review independent Safety
,
Engineering Group procedures. The fourth violation involves two examples of failing to
l
adhere to written procedures for design basis docurnents. The fifth violation concerns
I
assigning inappropriate significance levels to two condition reports. The sixth violation
l
'
\\[
eso622oo44 98o611
y\\hDwsL';
.
ADOCK 05000423
.\\
!
-
a
V
l
1
.
j
,.
.
'
4
I
I
June 11,1998
EA 98-293
!
1
!
Mr. M. L. Bowling, Recovery Officer - Technical Services
j
C/O Ms. P. A. Loftus, Director - Regulatory
i
Affairs for Millstone Station
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
PO Box 128
Waterford, CT 06385
Dear Mr. Bowling:
SUBJECT:
NRC TEAM INSPECTION 50-423/97-82 snd NOTICE OF VIOLATION
On February 26,1998, the NRC completed a team inspection of the Northeast Utilities
(NU) controls in identifying, resolving and preventing issues that degrade the quality of
plant operations or safety at Millstone Unit 3. The enclosed report presents the results of
that inspection.
This tecm inspection was performed onsite from February 9 through February 20,1998,
using NRC Inspection Procedure 40500," Effectiveness of Licensee Controls in Identifying,
Resolving and Preventing Problems." Overall, the team found evidence of improving
performance. The corrective action program is adequate to support restart, but it is clear
that the program will continue to require careful monitoring by NU management to ensure
sustained performance. Self-assessments were typically of high quality. The quality
assurance and quality control functions of the Nuclear Oversight organization have
improved as a direct result of improved staffing, qualifications, and knowledge level. Of
note is the Nuclear Oversight Restart Verification Assessment, which the team considered
to be a strong initiative. All three safety review committees (Nuclear Safety Assessment
Board, Site Operations Review Committee, and Plant Operations Review Committee)
operated effectively and provided quality input in addressing the issues before them. The
team also noted that the independent Safety Engineering Group has made considerable
progress albeit at the expense of performing safety reviews, in reducing the backlog of
operating experience (OE) reviews. The team found that management communications
methods with the plant staff were a strength. The plant staff feels that management is
receptive to problems brought forward and individuals generally characterized the
environment as improved and currently receptive to problem identification.
Nonetheless, our inspection identified six violations of NRC requirements. The first two
violations involve examples of inappropriate corrective actions: failure to take corrective
actions for recurrent problems with the boric acid transfer pumps and failing to complete all
of the work specified in an automated work order for modifications to service water flow
instrumentation. The third violation concerns failing to review independent Safety
Engineering Group procedures. The fourth violation involves two examples of failing to
adhere to written procedures for design basis documents. The fifth violation concerns
assigning inappropriate significance levels to two condition reports. The sixth violation
!
i
/y L' ,,. (y
g,
9006220044 900611
-)
\\
gor
aoocxomoga
__
- - _
l
Mr. M. L. Bowling
2
l
concerns the lack of organizationalindependence of the Radiation Protection Manager.
This is a concern because other similar examples of noncompliance with Section 6.0 of the
plant's Technical Specifications were found during the inspection.
These violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation and the circumstances
surrounding them are described in detailin the enclosed report. Please note that you are
required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the
enclosed notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part,
to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with
regulatory requirements.
NRC review of SIL closure packages has closed SIL ltems No. 41 and 73.
This report captures the staff's observations of the program as it was implemented up to
the beginning of 1998. Your staff's implementation and refinement of the corrective
action program was still maturing at the time of the inspection, and the results of this
inspection indicate areas where continued improvements were needed. Our observations
since the time of the inspection are that the program has continued to progress, and the
team's conclusions that the program is adequate to support restart is even more valid at
this date. However, it is clear that continued management attention to sustain the
improvements made can be more completely assessed by evaluating long-term
performance, including the degree to which recurring problems manifest themselves over
time. In view of this consideration and the historical problems NNECO has had in
maintaining an effective corrective action program, we intend to conduct another IP 40500
l
inspection within about one year.
l
I
'
in accordance with 10 CFR Part 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this
letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
I
Wayne D. Lanning
Deputy Director of Inspections
Special Projects Office
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-423
l
Enclosures:
l
1.
i
2.
NRC Inspection Report 50-423/97-82
1
l
l
l
l
)
!
l
l
i
j
._
- - - .
.
_ - - _ - _ _ -
_ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - _ - _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _
-_ _ _ _ _
-*
4 ,.
.
.
. Mr. M. L'. Bowling -
3
cc w/encls:
B. Kenyon, President and Chief Executive Officer - Nucleer Group
M. H. Brothers, Vice President - Operations
J. McElwain; Recovery Officer - Millstone Unit 2
J. Streeter, Recovery Officer - Nuclear Oversight
G. D. Hicks, Director - Unit 3
'- J. A. Price, Director - Unit 2
D. Amerine, Vice President - Human Services
E. Harkness, Director, Unit 1 Operations
JJ Althouse, Manager - Nuclear Training Assessment Group
F. C. Rothen, Vice President, Work Services
J. Cantrell, Director - Nuclear Training (CT)
S. J.' Sherman, Audits and Evaluation
L. M. Cuoco, Esquire
J. R. Egan, Esquire
V. Juliano, Waterford Library
J. Buckingham, Department of Public Utility Control
S. B. Comley, We The People
State of Connecticut SLO Designee
D. Katz, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)
R. Bassilakis, CAN
i
J. M. Block, Attorney, CAN
'
S. P. Luxton, Citizens Regulatory Commission (CRC)
Representative T. Concannon
E. Woollacott, Co-Chairman, NEAC
l
!
!
,.
L.1_
_ _ _ _ _
-
_
. _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ -
.
___
__
.
.e.
.
.
,
.
Mr. M. L. Bowling
4
Distribution w/encis:
Region 1 Docket Room (with gap.y of concurrences)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
PUBLIC
FILE CENTEP., NRR (with Oriainal concurrences)
SPO Secretarial File, Region i
NRC Resident inspector
W. Axelson, ORA
B. Jones, PIMB/ DISP
W. Lanning, Deputy Director of Inspections, SPO, RI
D. Screnci, PAO
W. Travers, Director, SPO, NRR
-J. Lieberman, OE
Distribution w/encls (VIA E-MAIL):
M. Callahan, OCA
R. Correia, NRR
B. McCabe, OEDO
E. Imbro, Deputy Director of ICAVP Oversight, SPO, NRR
P. McKee, Deputy Director of Licensing, SPO, NRR
S. Reynolds, Chief, ICAVP Oversight, SPO, NRR
D. Screnci, PAO
Inspection Program Branch (IPAS)
DOCDESK
T. Walker, SES
.
t/
DOCUMENT NAME: ':\\ BRANCH 6\\lR9882.64
To r=elve a copy o this document, indicate in the box:
"C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure
"E" =
Copy with attachm nt/ enclosure
"N" =,, No copy
'
l OFFICE
Rgf)S[
l
Rl/pg
lE Rlfph
l
l
lNAME
St(6dfody7
Dtirr ;" ,
L#hifthf,
lDATE
f l[I nY
(>llll1?
6/IIIS/
[
/ OFFICIAL RECOl4D COPY
'
>
l
. -
____