IR 05000315/1996005

From kanterella
Revision as of 07:51, 29 June 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Provides Comments & Addl Supporting Info Re NRC Integrated Insp Repts 50-315/96-05 & 50-316/96-05
ML17333A594
Person / Time
Site: Cook  American Electric Power icon.png
Issue date: 09/27/1996
From: FITZPATRICK E
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER CO., INC.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
AEP:NRC:1238B, NUDOCS 9610110377
Download: ML17333A594 (11)


Text

CATEGORYj.REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM(RIDS)ACCESSION NBR:9610110377 DOC.DATE:

96/09/27NOTARIZED:

NODOCKET~~FACIL:50-315 DonaldC.CookNuclear?owerPlant,Unit1,IndianaM0500031550-316DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit2,IndianaM05000316AUTH.NAMEAUTHORAFFILIATION FITZPATRICK,E.

AmericanElectricPowerCo.,Inc.RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DocumentControlBranch(Document ControlDesk)

SUBJECT: Providescomments&addisuppoting inforeNRCIntegrated InspRepts50-315/96-05

&50-316/96-05.

DISTRIBUTION CODE:IEOIDCOPIESRECEIVED:LTR

/ENCLISIZE:TITLE:General(50Dkt)-Insp Rept/Notice ofViolation ResponseNOTES:INTERNAL:

RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-3PDAEOD/SPD/RAB DEDRONRR/DISP/PIPB NRR/DRPM/PECB NUDOCS-ABSTRACT OGC/HDS2COPIESLTTRENCL11111111111111RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME HICKMANPJ NRR/DRCH/HHFB NRR/DRPM/PERB OEDIRRGN3FILE01COPIESLTTRENCI11111111111111EXTERNAL:

LITCOBRYCE,JHNRCPDR1111NOAC11ENOTETOALL"RIDSNRECIPIENTS:

PLEASEHELPUSTOREDUCEWASTE.TOHAVEYOURNAMEORORGANIZATION REMOVEDFROMDISTRZBUTION LISTSORREDUCETHENUMBEROFCOPIESRECEIVEDBYYOUORYOURORGANIZATION, CONTACTTHEDOCUMENTCONTROLDESK(DCD)ONEXTENSION 415-2083TOTALNUMBEROFCOPIESREQUIRED:

LTTR17ENCL17 0'

IndianaMichiganPowerCompany500CircleDriveBuchanan, Ml491071395 INDIANANICHIRENPOVFERSeptember 27,l996AEP:NRCr1238B 10CFR50.4DocketNos.:50-31550-316U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission ATTN:DocumentControlDeskWashington, D.C.20555Gentlemen:

DonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2NRCINSPECTION REPORTSNO.50-315/96005 (DRP)AND50-316/96005 (DRP)ThisletterisinresponsetoaletterfromW.L.AxelsondatedJuly23,1996,thatforwarded NRCIntegrated Inspection Report50-315/316-96005 (DRP),coveringtheperiodfromApril9-May25,1996.Duringdiscussions withtheNRCRegionIIIstafffollowing oursystematic assessment oflicenseeperformance (SALP)board13report,wewerestronglyencouraged torespondtoourinspection reportstoprovideadditional information thatwebelievetobepertinent.

Wegenerally agreewiththeinformation presented intheinspection reportandfindittobeareasonable representation oftheinspection period.However,withregardtocertainareasofthereport,wewouldliketoprovidecommentsandadditional supporting information.

Thesecommentsreflectareaswherewebelieveinsufficient creditwasgivenforpositiveperformance attheplant,orissuesthatwebelievecouldhavebeenmoreappropriately characterized.

Ourcommentsareprovidedintheattachment tothisletter.

Sincerely,gd~p~VicePresident jenAttachment 96iOff0377 960927PDRADOCK050003158PDR U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Page2AEP:NRC:1238B cc:A.A.BlindA.B.BeachMDEQ-DW&RPDNRCResidentInspector J.R.Padgett

ATTACHMENT TOAEP'NRC'1238B REPLYTONRCINSPECTION REPORTNOS.50-315/96005 (DRP}AND50-316/96005 (DRP)

Attachment toAEP:NRC:1238B Page1Wegenerally agreewiththeinformation presented intheinspection reportandfindittobeareasonable representation oftheinspection period.However,thereareareasinthereportforwhichwewishtoprovidecomments.

Thesecommentsreflectareaswherewebelieveinsufficient creditwasgivenforpositiveperformance attheplant,orissuesthatwebelievecouldhavebeenmoreappropriately characterized.

Therearetwoissuesinthisinspection reportforwhichwewouldlikeyoutoconsideradditional information.

1996Unit2RefuelnOutaeTheperiodoftimecoveredbythisroutineinspection encompassed amajorportionofthesevenweekoutage;however,thereisonlyonesentenceinthereportwhichshedsanylightonthescopeofthisverysuccessful outage.AswestatedinourformalresponsetotheSALPboard13report,webelievethisoutageshouldberecognized asanindicator ofimprovement inourworkcontrolprocessandstandards, internalteamworkandcommunications, maintenance performance, andcommitment toexcellence inoperations.

Pre-Planned EntrintoaNotification ofUnusualEventUnt2OnSunday,April14,1996,afterappropriate safetyandmanagement reviewsandafterremovingallfuelfromthereactorvessel,bothemergency dieselgenerators wereremovedfromservice.Instrictcompliance withouremergency plan,anotification ofunusualevent(NOUE)wasmade.Becausethiswasavoluntary entryintoconditions requiring off-siteandNRCnotifications, ratherthananunplanned event-driven situation, effortsweremadetoclearlycommunicate toallinvolvedagencies, thenon-safety significance oftherequirednotifications.

Toemphasize theneedforaccuracyandtimeliness ofallemergency plannotifications, regardless ofthesafetysignificance, ithasbeenalongstandingpracticeatCookNuclearPlanttoconservatively classifyeventsinstrictcompliance withourexistingemergency planeventhoughthereactorisvoidofallfuelandclearlythesafetyintentoftheemergency plandoesnotapply.Wehadoriginally scheduled theperformance ofmaintenance onthetwodieselgenerators atseparatetimesintheoutageschedule.

However,delayswereencountered duringworkonthe2CDengine,encroaching ontheoriginalscheduleforworkonthe2ABengine.Itwasdecidedtoremovethe2ABenginefromserviceandperformworkonitsimultaneously.

Thisdecisionwasmade,andthesubsequent actiontakenonveryshortnotic Attachment toAEP:NRC:1238B Page2Priortothis,ithadbeenplannedtoremove,bothtrainsofessential servicewater(ESW),andbothtrainsofcomponent coolingwater(CCW).Thiswouldhavehadtheeffectofremovingbothdiesels,andwouldhaverequiredanintentional entryintoaNOUE.Whilethisplanwaslaterchangedsuchthatthedualservicewatertrainoutagedidnotoccur,theextensive upfrontplanningandsafetyreviewshadbeenconducted, andweredetermined toadequately covertheactionofremovingandworkingonbothdieselssimultaneously.

Becausethefinaldecisiontoworkonbothenginessimultaneously wasmadeonshortnotice,aplantnuclearsafetyreviewcommittee (PNSRC)meetingwascalledonSundaymorningtoreviewthesafetyandshutdownriskreviewscoveringthisnewwork,priortoimplementing thedecision.

Themajoremphasisofthisreviewwastoensureasuitableandreliableheatsinkforthespentfuelpool.Theresidentreceivedaninformation callattheconclusion ofthemeetingpriortotakingactiontoremovethedieselgenerators andtheentryintotheNOUE.Intheinspection report,theresidentinspector drewthefollowing conclusions abouttheevent;"Theinspectors determined thatthisevolution hadminimalsafetyconsequence giventheplantconditions.

Thelicenseemadeeffective useoftheextensive preparations forthedualtrainESW/CCWoutage..."

Weagreewiththeseconclusions drawnbytheresidentinspector.

However,theinspection reportqualifies theseconclusions withrelatedconcerns, severalofwhichwewishtocommenton.Theinspector's conclusion statement goesontosay;"...However, theneedforthelicenseetointentionally enteraNOUEforsevendayswasnotdemonstrated."

Wehaveacknowledged thatinlightoftheplantcondition andminimalsafetyconsequences, thisdecisionwasmadeinsupportofouroutageschedule.

However,wedonotbelievethatthedecisionwasinappropriately influenced bythedesiretoremainonschedule.

Inthepast,instrictaccordance withtheemergency plan,wehaveenteredsimilarconditions whilethereactorisvoidoffuelwhich,however,stillrequireclassification asanNOUE.Seniormanagement requiresthatallplannedmaintenance activities haveasafetybenefit.Ifthisbenefitisnotdemonstrated, themaintenance isnotauthorized.

Inthiscasethebenefitofremovingthedieselgenerators wastodetermine quicklytherootcauseofthefailureoftheCAMfollowersprings.Considering theinconsequential effectithadonshutdownsafety,webelievethe h'gilcll4 Attachment toAEP:NRC:1238B Page3benefitofquicklyidentifying therootcauseofthefailurewassignificant.

Thispromptactionhadtheconcurrent benefitofavoidingoutagedelay.Wearenotawareofmethodologies orstandards fordemonstrating abalancebetweenimproving thematerialcondition ofplantequipment versustheneedtoenteracondition meetingclassification requirements perouremergency plan.Thisparticular requirement forenteringanunusualeventhaslongbeenconsidered ofminimalsafetyconsequence forpublicsafetybytheNRC.Thisisevidenced bythefactthatitisbeingremovedfromtherequirements forutilities pursuingchangestotheiremergency actionlevels(EALs)usingguidancedeveloped undertheauspicesofNUHARCandendorsedbytheNRCandFEHA.Anotherconcernexpressed intheinspection reportreads:"Thelicenseehadmadenoefforttopursueapromptrevisionoftheemergency classification criteriainanefforttoavoidtheNOUE.Unrelated tothiseventthelicenseehadpreviously submitted arequesttotheNRCtochangethecriteria, butthischangewasnotyetfinal.ThelicenseemadenoefforttohavetheNRCincreasethepriorityoftheirchangerequest."

Ourformalsubmittal forawholesale conversion ofCookNuclearPlant'sEALsfromtheoldNUREG-0654 Appendix1guidancetothenewNUMARC/NESP-007 guidancehasbeenonthedocketinsomeformoranothersince1994.Wearecurrently expecting approvalinmidtolateOctoberofthisyear.Aminimumimplementation schedule, oncetheNRCapprovesthechange,isfourteenweekslong.Thisincludespr'ocedure modification, trainingandverification, priortomakingthechangeofficial.

EvenifNRRhadbeenwillingtoincreasetheprioritybeingaffordedourEALsubmittal, itwouldnothaveconstituted apractical solutiontotheproblem.Thisissuerepresents oneiteminasubstantial submittal package,andwouldhaverequiredaseparateeffortforonsiteimplementation ifapproved.

Noneofthiscouldhavebeenaccomplished inthetimeframeinwhichthissituation arose,andsubsequent scheduling decisions weremade.Moreover, webelieveitisunreasonable toholdalicenseeaccountable forNRCpriorities whicharenotwithinalicensee's contro it