IR 05000275/1992013

Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-140,consisting of 920416,mgt Meeting Repts 50-275/92-13 & 50-323/92-13

ML20059D111
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	08/24/1993
From:	Zimmerman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
References
OLA-2-I-MFP-140, NUDOCS 9401070006
Download: ML20059D111 (8)

Text

-

IV i A4 l'TV

'

RECEIVED ' -l t J/21/rT13 h// 188517 NUCLEAR REGULATORY

!

l

/ *'% UNITED ST ES AFFAIRS p' # '

- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION u , D Ib i

! .. g i j REGION v ' ~ APR 201992 j Y

kNa. '[/

%, ~ ". '. .

' 1450 MARIA AE WALNUT CREEK, CAUFORNIA 94

-

sp o 28 9. 6 '

1 HD DISTRIBUTION CHRON l RMS ONL APR 161Nd ,

lp W5 f

Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323  :

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street,' Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106 l Attention: Mr. G. M. Rueger Senior Vice President and General Manager l

j Nuclear Power Generation Business Unit l Gentlemen:

L

SUBJECT: MANAGEMENT MEETING ,

This refers to the management meeting held with members 'of your staff at the PG&E Community Center in San Luis Obispo on April 2,1992. Subjects discussed during the meeting are summarized in the enclosed meeting repor ,

Your staff described issues associated with recent containment fan cooler unit backdraft damper failu es and main feedwater-pump inverter failures.

l The discussions centered on timely identification and correction of problems.

l The status of other routine programs was also reviewe The discussions regarding the containment fan _ cooler units and the main feedwater pump problems illustrate that your staff is not always resolving-indications of system problems in a prompt, thorough manner. The timeliness of your corrective actions for known problems has been a past issue of concern. We encourage you to ensure that emerging issues or problems are not confined to maintenance for resolution but are-fully addressed with engineering and quality oversight. organizations' involveme'nt'from the point-of identificatio In accordance with -10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosures '

will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roo Your continued cooperation is appreciated. If you have any questions-concerning this management meeting report, we will be pleased-to discuss them with yo ,

Sincerely, RECEIVED

i APR211992 P. Zimmerman, Director e.,,... !.7,.i c.e.,

d ~ 2 75fz3-04d 2 Division of Reactor Safety gO g6 and Projects ENCLOSURE AVAILABLE 9401070006 930824 h/N' IN ACTS FILES AT 333/AB018 -'223-7790-

-

PDR ADOCK 05000275 Q PDR _

__ ..

.__.,_f

- .1..2- A _ - __. , ..- - a;- , 4 Aw_ m-_.A _s . --r --- 4+

4e

,

.l A

!

i l

i

i

!

4

4 i

!

4 l

!

)a

!

<

k i

i I

l

}

.

e a

f

3 s

$

3 i

A E

i

., >e I

"

.

,

i -

w -

1 1D i;}

! s %)

3 (M/ I

! O -

<

n ; Wl >

f.; ,, 5 I

.

l <2 2 *g, +

' } .

ni gl

;

J p w'; %=; n M'

j O ~Y - j y = .

j gi EM e i

[

i

'

I, t!b J l,~

{ $ad G ,j h

.

^

j O i 36r, g, . m,

• 4 (' )' k: $x s' ,' ' I

, ,

I Vsj

, '

a

.: \44 m

_

w b'Y *J ~

\; , aE ,-

' S i

• _ _ .__- . - . ---

_ - .. . .. . -.

,,

. 188517 o

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report No /92-13 and 50-323/92-13 Docket No and 50-323

'

License No DPR-80 and DPR-82 Licensee: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106 Facilit'y Name: Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Meeting at: San Luis 0bispo, California ,

Meeting Conducted: April 2, 1992

.

Report Prepared by: .[ M F4 Al-15 C ,

M. H. Miller, Resident Inspector Date Signed Approved by: bt-d MD_ /

P. H. Johnson, Chief F K-. 4-/5-42 Date Signed-Reactor Projects Section Summary: An announced periodic management meeting was held to discuss recent Diablo Canyon events and issues, and to review progress of licensee program l l

. ~ . . - . . . .. <

... . . .- - . .. . . ..

P 18851 *

DETAlls Meetina Attendees Licensee Attendees .

R. Anderson, Manager, Nuclear Engineering and Construction Services (NECS)

M. Angus, Manager, Technical Services J. Blakley, Sr. Licensing Engineer, Nuclear Safety Assessment and Regulatory Affairs (NSARA)

J. Castner, Regulatory Compliance M. Davido, Senior Engint:u. , NECS R. Domer, Vice President, General _ Engineering and Construction W. Fujimoto, Vice President, Nuclear Technical Services J. Gisclon, Acting Manager, Nuclear Operations Support

.

W. Goelzer, System Engineering T. Grebel, Supervisor, Regulatory Compliance B. Giffin, Manager, Maintenance Services K. Herman, Supervisor, Instrumentation and Controls Engineering J. Hoch, Manager, NSARA P. Lang, Senior Engineer, Quality Control T. Leserman, Nuclear Operations Support N. Malenfant, Corporate Communications T. Nelson, Nuclear Operations Support H. Phillips, Director, Electrical Maintenance J. Phipps, Systems Engineering R. Powers, Director, Mechanical Maintenance G. Rueger, Sr. Vice President, Nuclear Power Generation J. Sexton, Manager, Quality Assurance J. Shiffer, Executive Vice President J. Shoulders, Onsite Proje'ct Engineering, NECS D. Sokolsky, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs H. Thaller, Supervisor,_ Piping EngineerSg, NECS J. Tompkins, Director, NSARA J. Townsend, Vice President, Diablo Cinyon Operations .

M. Tresler, DCPP Project Engineer R. Webb, NCIS Engineering NRC Recion V Attendees J. Martin, Regional Administrator L. Miller, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch M. Miller, Resident Inspector . i l

P. Morrill, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1 K. Perkins, Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects

!

R. Scarano, Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards i H. Wong, Senior Resident Inspector

.

i

)

!

)

.

,

- 188517 2 NRC Headouarters Attendees C. Regan, Assistant Project Manager, Project Directorate - V H. Rood, Project Manager, Project Directorate - V Qther Attendeet Jeff Heal June Von Ruden, Mothers for Peace 2. Details Mr. Martin opened the meeting, stating that this was a periodic meeting to review topics of general interest and concern. He observed ~that .

several management meetings had been conducted at or near the Diablo Canyon site, and future meetings would be conducted at locations open for public attendanc Containment Fan Cooler Unit Backdraft Dampers PG&E presented their evaluation of recent containment fan cooler unit (CFCU) problems. Several of the CFCUs were found to have backdraft dampers that did not fully close when the fan was secured. This event is described in Licensee Event Report 50-275/91-1 PG&E also demonstrated a mechanical model of a backdraft damper to illustrate the various technical concern Mr. Giffin noted that a contributing cause of inadequate maintenance of the CFCUs, which led in part to the problems, was underestimating the safety significance of the-backdraft damper He added that during the troubleshooting process, although there was a concern that the dampers were open, no one initially thought to verify that the dampers would fully close when the associated fan was shut down. Mr. Morrill commented that in meetings with 1 PG&E in February 1992, the NRC had urged visual verification to determine if CFCU counter rotation was occurrin Mr. Rueger stated that the NECS organization was involved early in i the CFCU concerns. This was due to processes put in place after i issues concerning Regulatory Guide 1.97 occurred in late 199 Mr. Fujimoto added that a methodology to establish an integrated problem response team had been established. A team had been formed and had met to resolve the CFCU issue The NRC questioned the licensee regarding why indications of broken bolts on backdraft dampers in March of 1991 were not adequately followed up. Mr. Perkins considered that the system engineer should have been involved in determining the cause of broken bolts since system problems may have been the root cause. In addition, management should better communicate expectations to system ,

engineers to identify system initiated problems and the need to evaluate system history. Mr. Townsend agreed that system

_ -

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

! -

L 188517 '

'

-

i I 5

'

! 3-

!

! engineering has the responsibility for tracking the history of-

these kinds of problems, however he felt that the component engineers should have resolved the cause of the broken bolt I l

Mr. Fujimoto noted that, after evaluation of industry and '

historical experience, the integrated problem response team- '

i identified that adequate safety margin remained in the dasoars,-in j that the CFCUs contained around 800 bolts, and that. only awut 20 -l '

. had been found broke .

-

.

j -7 Mr. Martin observed that the March 1991 failure to evaluate..the y e broken bolt issue illustrated.a lack of basic engineering.- )

} instincts. Mr. Martin closed the discussion of this issue by ,

stating that the attitude should be that if any bolts are broken,

'

i there is.a problem. He restated the.NRC concern that' licensee

'

i

! management needed to communicate _the right expectations-for' l 1 resolving problems to all engineering groups and to organizations

_

l i performing the quality assurance function ;

I Feedwater pumo Trio j l

) The licensee has experienced several feedwater pump problems due to l l the failure of an associated control system power supply. The i j licensee presented a discussion of technical and historical 3 information concerning this issue. Mr. Rueger stated that PG&E may.

l have been too narrowly focused on the issue, causing PG&E to fix i the existing equipment, rather than;to' question the adequacy of the 1 design after repeated failures. Mr. Fujimoto noted that since the j equipment had been redesigned in February, 1989,.there was a

'

tendency to continue to try to make the new design work, rather l than reassess the design.

!

i

'

Mr. Martin observed that it was not typical .of a strong engineering organization to wait for several failures to fix a deficient design, particularly in the case of these failures, which resulted

,

in challenges to operators and the_ plant. He noted that-the i December 3,1991, failure should have raised serious. concerns, and j should have been dealt with more. forcefully. Each: action PG&E took 4 may have appeared reasonable when considered individually, but not .

-

in perspective with the whole issue. - Although these particular

! components were not safety-related,.there is a need tp come to:

I terms with timely corrective action for these situatitns;before problems arise with higher. safety significance..

l

-

'

Mr. Rueger agreed, noting that he had used this. issue as an example i of an area requiring improvement.

' Eouioment Unavailability i .

.

1 The licensee presented summaries of availability data for key-l safety systems. Data indicated that system availability at.Diablo

Canyon was in the highest quarter of the industry, i

!

!

-

+ y 9 , - -

,y, v- yg r ,r, av , p-e-- weM--r d 'F-w *a m N & wwe wem'=' T- -= * eae e + h e re- s e* ar~--e a e i--sr*s-- r-pe..<-irw*

- - - . - - . .- . -. . . - . . - - - - . -. - - . - - - - -

i i

- -

188517

,o .

l Desian Basis Document Proaram  ;

)

Mr. Tresler presented the status of_this program, and noted that-- )

the documents were being used and updated by individuals'

(' throughout the organization Mr. Martin stated that retention o !

l design basis information was very important, particularly when )

considering the loss of.' knowledge of. the plant design due.to '

-1 personnel losse ' Individual Plant Examination (IPE)

'

Mr. Giscion presented the. status'and results of the program. The licensee confirmed that actual system availability data was being factored into the IPE. As a result of: identifying principle'

sources of. risk, plant improvements have been made which increase plant safet In response to'NRC' questions, PG&E noted that changes had been made to the preventi've maintenance. program, and shut down risk was being examined through an EPRI stud .

.

Mr. Martin asked if PG&E was communicating with industry concerning risks of mid-loop operations. .Mr. Townsend replied that PG&E.has taken an active part in industry meetings discussing-the risks.of-mid-loop operation l Pioina Erosion / Corrosion Control  ;

Mr. Martin expressed concern that many industry erosion / corrosion prediction and monitoring programs were quite extensive, but-relied on computer programs which had limiting assumptions. He questioned j how PG&E was addressing the limitations .of. industry computer code Mr. Shiffer replied that PG&E was activ;ely dealing'w'ith the issu PG&E does not rely on only one source of-expertise or analysis, '

but rather on industry experience, Diablo Canyon' experience, and EPRI computer programs. .PG&E has identified sit"ations;where .

computer algorithms do not correlate with field ~ measurement ;

, Conclusion -5 l M Mr. Shiffer stated his concern that this' meeting coverid many.cf the  ;

same programatic issues discussed in past meetings and indicated his ,

understanding that engineering needs to more quickly. resolve. indications .

of problems' with systems.- He also noted that the system' engineers .had ~  !

many examples of success to contrast with the problems discussed in this

'

meetin ,

i

.

'

Mr. Martin stated that there was a need to work on basicLengineering '

instincts and that the areas' discussed may be representative of problems'

which have not yet been discovered. Of particular concern are problems where everyone involved appeared to do their job,lbut the problem wa .

t

• - a

-,,,y.m_i9, _-, - , s ---,-mm . -,*-,..m- ..-c .,.%..f,,,,. .,,,y.. ,, m , e . . . .-..e+ +- - -We wE-r w w . =- +.

-

. .

, (

188517 .,

!

'

i not successfully resolved because of lack of overall perspective. M l'

Martin concluded that management expectations should direct technical organizations to seek out these types of problems. Mr. Shiffer agree Mr. Martin stated that items on the agenda which were not covered in this meeting should be covered in the next management meeting.. The meeting was adjourne .

l l

l e

I l

...

-- . - . - . ,, . . - - - . ,.. ..- - ... . . - .., . -- .- - _ , . - . .