IR 05000277/1988039

Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-277/88-39 & 50-278/88-39

ML20247D989
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	03/16/1989
From:	Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Corbin McNeil PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
NUDOCS 8903310264
Download: ML20247D989 (2)

Text

_ - - _ . - _ __

. .

7 _.

'

. c. 3, w 'A

.

a, . MAR 161989.

,

w ,

Docket Nos.,50-277 50-278'

Philadelphia Electric Company Peach ~ Bottom Atomic Power.. Station-

-ATTN: C.LA. McNeill'

. Executive Vice President-Nuclear

' Correspondence Control Desk P.O. Box 7520'

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 19101 Gentlemen:

Subject: ' Inspection Nos. 50-277/88-39 and 50-278/88-39-This' refers t'o your letter.~ dated February 6,1989, in response to our letter

~ dated January 9,1989.

2s , .

. Thank you for-informing us of the corrective and preventive actions documented.

in your. letter. These actions will be examined during a future inspection of your. licensed program.

Your cooperation with us is appreciated.

Sincerely, Original Signed By:

Thomas T. r!.artin Thomas T. Martin,-Director Division of Reactor Safety O\

\'0 i1 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY RL PB 50-277&278/88-39 - 0001.0.0 03/15/89 8903310264 890316 $

PDR ADOCK 05000277 i

'O PNU. 1

- - _ _ _ - - - _ _ - . .

-

, ,

.

.

j- 'PhiTadelphiaElectricCompany 2 cc:

>

John S. Kemper, Sr.,' Senior Vice President-Nuclear J.-W. Gallagher, Vice President, Nuclear Services E.'C. Kistner, Chairman, Nuclear Review Board Dickinson M. Smith, Vice President, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Jack Vrban, General Manager, Fuels Department, Delmarva Power & Light Co.

John F. Franz, Plant Manager, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Troy B. Conner, -Jr. , Esquire W. H. Hirst, Director, Joint Generation Projects Department,

-Atlantic Electric Bryan W. Gorman, Manager, . External Affairs Eugene J. Bradley, Esquire, Assistant General Counsel (Without Report)

.

Raymond L. Hovis, Esquire Thomas Magette,. Power Plant Siting, Nuclear Evaluations W. M. Alden, Director, Licensing Section Doris Poulsen, Secretary of Harford County Council Public Document Room.(PDR)

Local lPublic Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

'NRC Resident Inspector Commonwealth of Pennsylvania bcc:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)

'Section Chief, DRP Robert J. Bores, DRSS R. Martin, NRR M. Johnson, EDO C

3/h89 3/g/89 3/ 9 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY RL PB 50-277&278/88-39 - 0001.1.0 03/15/89

__ -- _ . - - - -

-

_. -- -

/140F17 M 'f.. ..

,,

.

'. ,

"

J

-

. ,

.,.~ l

-

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY l PEACH BUTIOM ATOMIC POWER STATION R. D.1, Box 208 'jf Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 esaca axrow-nes rowen or axcmusca ' (717) 456 7014 ~ ,

,

OcIPmsen: February 6, 1989 Docket Nos. 50-277

" 50-278-

. j l

U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission ATTN:. Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-137 Washington, DC 20555 SUBJECT:, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Response to Inspection Report No. 50 '277/88-39 and 50-278/88-39 REFERENCES: 1) January 9, 1989 Letter from T. T. Martin (NRC) to C. A. McNeill (PEC0)

2)-January 11, 1989 LetterfromD.M. Smith (PECO)to-W. T. Russell'(NRC)

Dear Sir:

This is in response'to reference 1) letter which transmitted Peach Bottom LInspection Report No.- 50-277/88-39; 50-278/88-39. This report documents the

'

NRC evaluation of Peach Bottom' Operator performance at the site specific simulator during.the week of. December 12, 1988. This report requests Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO) to respond in writing with corrective-

_

action plans for identified program weaknesses, including a determination when the affected crew and the Shift Supervisor, along with his crew will be ready for an additional NRC assessment. The reference 2) letter notified the NRC of the involved shift crews' readiness for reassessment.

The' attachment tb this letter provides Philadelphia Electric Company Corrective Action Plan for the identified program weaknesses.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely, W

~

_N fIX'M ' p'/ - )

- - _ - _ - _ .

'

.ii

-

, ,

s.

. .

..

,

,.

y . Page 2  :

j-c l cc:.'J. T.'Boettger,'Public Service Electric-& Gas INP0 Records Center .

~

]

T. P. Johnson, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector T. E..'Magette, State of Maryland.

R. Reichel, Delmarva Power.

'W. T. Russell, Administrator,. Region I,:USNRC H. C. Schwemm, Atlantic Electric J. Urban, Delmarva Power -

'i

~

r (

l

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

, ,

,

L, . .. ,

p. -

• Attachment

!'

Page l'of 2 l

Requested Response

_

Corrective Action Plans Based upon our observations of crew performance during the NRC evaluation

.and our review of the Generic Conclusions in Section 4 of the subject -

Inspection Report, the following areas for improvement have been identified.

These areas have been reviewed with Mr. Florek of your staff to be certain that the proper Generic Conclusions are being addressed. Our corrective action plans and reference to the appropriate NRC Generic Conclusions are included.

1. Procedure T-240 (Tenninating and Preventing Injection of Water Into the RPV) is less than adequate and training in use of the procedure has been less than adequate (Generic Conclusion No. 11).

Corrective Action Plan:

-a. As noted in the Inspection Report, a revision to T-240 is being prepared to provide better direction in regard to terminating and

- e preventing injection of water into the RPV. A target issue date of March 1989 has been assigned.

b. Training in the implementation of the existing T-240 procedure was given to the involved crews prior to the January 12, 1989 NRC assessment.

c. Training on the revision to T-240 will be given to shift crews as part of the. continuing training program.

2. Crew team work in the area of reactor power control using reactor water level as per Procedure T-117 can be improved (Generic Conclusion No.11).

During the ATWS scenarios, awareness that the APRM downscale indications had occurred was somewhat delayed for several crews (Generic Conclusion No. 7).

Corrective Action Plan:

a. Training in the use of T-117 for control of reactor power using reactor water level, including the importance of closely monitoring APRM downscale indications was given to the involved crews prior to the January 12, 1989 NRC assessment.

b. The training described in Corrective Action 2.a will be given to remaining shift crews as part of the continuing training program.

I l

_ _ _ _ _ _ - -____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - -

-- ._

,; .

.

. .

..

. J* .

. . .

Attachment

-

Page 2 of 2 3. Communications were not always specific (i.e., specific bands for control of a parameter were not always given) (Generic Conclusion No. 10).

Corrective Action Plan:

a. The need to include appropriate control bands when giving operational directions has been stressed in previous training and will continue to '

be included in critiques of performance.

b. The need to include appropriate control bands when giving operational directions was covered with the involved Shift Supervisors prior to the additional NRC assessments on January 12, 1989. As specifically noted by the NRC during the January 12, 1989 exit meeting, performance in this area was satisfactory during the January 12, 1989 assessments.

4. In some cases, Reactor Operators did not immediately request clarification from Shif t Supervisors when control bands for parameters were not included in operational directions (Generic Conclusion No. 10). On two occasions, Reactor Operators did not question the Shift Supervisor's direction on key safety significant evolutions (Generic Conclusion No.12).

-

Corrective Action Plan: ' --

a. The protocol for Reactor Operators to obtain clarification of operating directions and for questioning the appropriateness of key safety significant evolutions will be covered in continuing training for shift crews.

b. The training described in Corrective Action 4.a was given to the involved shift crews prior to the additional NRC assessments on January 12, 1989.

c. The Peach Bottom Operator's Manual and the Operations Management Manual will be evaluated and revised, as appropriate, to ensure that these topics are adequately addressed, i

5. All Emergency Notification System (ENS) calls during the scenarios were performed within the required time. However, NRC indicated that

'

improvements can be made in the timeliness of the ENS calls. (Generic Conclusion No. 9) j

Corrective Action Plan: 1 The policy of making ENS calls as soon as practical consistent with the transient and implementation of other responsibilities, and certainly within the regulatory time limits, will be covered in continuing training.

I I

I L . - - - - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _