IR 05000315/1994013
| ML18005A034 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1994 |
| From: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Fitzpatrick E INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17332A226 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9407260181 | |
| Download: ML18005A034 (11) | |
Text
JUL 80 1994 Docket No. 50-315 Docket No. 50-316 Indiana Michigan Power Company ATTN:
Mr. E. Senior, Vice President Nuclear Generation 1 Riverside Plaza
'olumbus, OH 43216
Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick:
This refers to the routine safety inspection conducted by Messrs.
James A.
Isom, David J. Hartland, and Douglas L. Shepard of this office from June 4,
1994, through July 1, 1994.
The inspection included a review of activities at your Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, facility.
At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report.
Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel.
Based on the results of this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in violation of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice).
The violation pertained to repeated packing failures of a Unit 2 main steam test selector valve over a period of 2 years that resulted in several entries into 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Limiting Conditions of Operations.
This was of concern because of the potential for this condition to effect the operation of the main steam stop valves, and during this 2 year, period, there were several missed opportunities to repair this valve without entering an LCO.
I Additionally, during this inspection, other activities appeared to be in violation of NRC requirements.
However, as described in the enclosed inspection report, you identified these violations; and to encourage and support licensee initiatives for self-identification and correction of violations, these violations are not being cited because the criteria specified in Section VII.B(2) of the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement Policy,
CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1994)),
were satisfied.
1~&t,~!
s 940726018i 940720 PDR ADQCK 050003lS PDR
Indiana Michigan Power Company JUL 80 p~a
One of the non-cited violations concerns the failure to conduct a management and medical determination for an individual who had prior positive fitness for duty test results.
Had the test, results been known, you would not have granted access.
This was caused by your contractor's failure to disclose the previous positive test results.
The incident was investigated by the NRC Region III Office of Investigations (OI).
OI determined that a background investigation had been falsified; however, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that this falsification was done deliberately.
The synopsis of the OI investigation is enclosed for your review.
No written response or further action pertaining to this matter is required.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response.
In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence.
After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter, the enclosure, and your response to this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter (and the accompanying Notice) are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwor k Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning'his inspection.
Sincerely,
Enclosures:
1.
Inspection Report No.
50-315/94013(DRP);
50-316/94013 (DRP)
3.
Synopsis of OI Investigation See Attached Dist ib tion 7= 0. gaul~
Edward G. Greenman, Direc r
Division of Reactor Projects (see attached concurrence)
RIII RIII RIII Orsini Creed Pirok RIII Kropp RIII ree m
Indiana Michigan Power Company JUL 2G 1934 One of the non-cited violations concerns the failure to conduct a management and medical determination for an individual who had prior positive FFD test results.
Had the test results been known, you would not have granted a
REGION III==
801 WARRENVILLEROAD LISLE, ILLINOIS60532-4351 JUL So l994 Docket No. 50-315 Docket No. 50-316 Indiana Hichigan Power Company ATTN:
Hr. E. Senior Vice President
'Nuclear Generation 1 Riverside Plaza Columbus, OH 43216
Dear Hr. Fitzpatrick:
This refers to the routine safety inspection conducted by Hessrs.
James A.
Isom, David J. Hartland, and Douglas L. Shepard of this office from June 4, 1994, through July 1, 1994.
The inspection included a review of activities at your Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, facility.
At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report.
Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel.
Based on the results of this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in violation of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice).
The violation pertained to repeated packing failures of a Unit 2 main steam test selector valve over a period of 2 years that resulted in several entries into 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Limiting Conditions of Operations.
This was of concern because of the potential for this condition to effect the operation of the main steam stop valves, and during this 2 year period, there were several missed opportunities to repair this valve without entering an LCO.
Additionally, during this inspection, other activities appeared to be in violation of NRC requirements.
However, as described in the enclosed inspection report, you identified these violations; and to encourage and support licensee initiatives for self-identification and correction of violations, these violations are not being cited because the criteria specified in Section VII.B(2) of the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement Policy,
CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1994)),
were 'satisfied.
Indiana Hichigan Power Company JUL 2 (; ]~<op One of the non-cited violations concerns the failure to conduct a management
=
ahd medical determination for an individual who had prior positive fitness for duty test results.
Had the test results been known, you would not have granted access.
This was caused by your contractor's failure to disclose the previous positive test results.
The incident was investigated by the NRC Region III Office of Investigations (OI).
OI determined that a background investigation had been falsified; however, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that this falsification was done deliberately.
The synopsis of the OI investigation is enclosed for your review.
No written response or further action pertaining to this matter is required.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response.
In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence.
After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regul'ations, a copy of this letter, the enclosure, and your response to this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter (and, the accompanying Notice) are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely,
~>A Edward G.
Greenman, Director Division of Reactor Projects Enclosures:
1.
Inspection Report No.
50-315/94013 (DRP);
50-316/94013 (DRP)
3.
Synopsis of OI Investigation See Attached Distribution
Indiana Michigan Power Company Distribution cc w/enclosure:
A. A. Blind, Plant Manager OC/LFDCB Resident Inspector, RIII James R. Padgett, Michigan Public Service Commission Michigan Department of Public Health D.'C. Cook, LPM, NRR S. Stein, SRS