ML20012D618

From kanterella
Revision as of 01:31, 21 February 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to NRC 900215 Ltr Re Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-334/89-23 & 50-412/89-22.Corrective Actions:Safety Injection Signal Reset & Plant Returned to Presafety Injection Conditions & Crew Members Counseled
ML20012D618
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley
Issue date: 03/15/1990
From: Sieber J
DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9003280137
Download: ML20012D618 (2)


Text

~ _ m _ __

i .

r, - -

vor ley Power Station Shrppingport. PA 150776 l

l JOHN D Git'BER (412) 393-626$

vc.p,. .ni.w. ,o,oo, l

March 15, 1990 '

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Attnt- Document control Desk )

L Washington, DC 20555 {

Reference:

Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 and No. 2 BV-1 Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66 BV-2 Docket No. 50-412, License No. NPF-73  ;

l Combined Inspection Report 50-334/89-23 and 50-412/89-22

. Gentlement q a

l In response to NRC correspondence dated February 15, 1990 and in ,

accordance with 10 CFR 2.201, the attached reply addresses the Notice of Violation included with the referenced inspection report. ,

If there are any questions concerning this response, please i contact my office.

i Very truly yours, l i

AL Y

{D.Sieber Vice President Nuclear Group L Attachment l cc Mr. J. Beall, Sr. Resident Inspector  ;

Mr. W. T. Russell, NRC Region I Administrator ]

Mr. Edward-C. Wenzinger, Chief Reactor Projects Branch No. 4, Division of Reactor Projects, Region I l: I Mr. P. Tam, Sr. Project Manager Mr. R. Saunders (VEPCO) _

r R

1 l

0 m / )

9003280137 900315 '5 t

l PDR ADOCK 05000334 j /  !

m o enn c (\)  !

l L

7- DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Nuclear Group Beaver Valley Power Station Units 1 and 2 Reciv to Notice of Violation I Combined NRC Inspection Report 50-334/89-23 and 50-412/89-22 )

Letter dated February 15, 1990 '

I VIOLATION (Severity Level IV, Supplement I)

Descriotion of Violation (50-334/89-23-01) ,

1 Technical Specification 6.8 requires that written procedures be  ;

established, implemented, and maintained covering activities listed l in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February, 1978.

operating Manual Procedure OM 1.1.4W requires that when returning a train of Solid State Protection System to service, all trips be  !

inhibited until the Low Pressurizer Pressure and Low Steam Line  !

Pressure safety Injection signals are blocked. ]

l contrary to the above, on December 13, 1989, Train A of the Solid i Stat.t

. Protection System was returned to service without the Low Pressurizer Pressura and Low Steam Line Pressure Safety Injection  ;

[

signals blocked. This resulted in a Safety Injection actuation. ,

I i Corrective Action Taken i

. Our review of this event indicates that the cause of the unplanned l Safety Injection actuation was the failure of the crew to follow the approved procedure for returning the Solid State Protection System (SSPS) to service. Deficiencies in understanding the functions of 1 the SSPS' test switches led the. crew to believe that they could i restore the single switch involved without reliance on the procedure  !

that is used for full system restoration. )

J 1

operations personnel reset the safety injection signal and returned I the plant to pre-safety injection conditions. Additional corrective I steps included formal written counseling of the crew members involved. This counseling included crew responsibilities in regard to utilizing available procedures, and the role of shift communication / teamwork in preventing such events.

Action Taken to Prevent Recurrence 4

To avoid further violations, this event was covered in detail during license retraining classes which were completed on March 2, 1990. j

, The training clarified the specific functions of the SSPS switches and -included a step by step discussion of the OM 1.1.4W procedure.

i Each licensed individual was required to participate in the procedure I

review.

Date of Full Comoliance l

Full compliance has been achieved at this time.

1 I

_ _ _ _ _,