IR 05000324/1996014

Discusses Insp Repts 50-324/96-14 & 50-325/96-14 on 960624- 0917 & Forwards NOV & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties in Amount of $150,000.Predecisional Enforcement Conference Held on 961021 to Discuss Apparent Violations

ML20135A173
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	11/19/1996
From:	Reyes L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Campbell W CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML20135A176	List: IR 05000324/1996014 ML20135A189
References
EA-96-354, NUDOCS 9612030098
Download: ML20135A173 (7)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:r ,

*
      .
. i November 19, 1996 EA 96 354 Carolina Power & Light Company ATTN: Mr. W. Vice President Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Post Office Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES -
 $150,000 (NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50 325/96 14 AND 50 324/96 14)

Dear Mr. Campbell:

This refers to the inspection conducted between June 24 and September 17, 1996, at the Brunswick facility. The inspection included a review of your i environmental qualification (EQ) program in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49. You were informed of the results of our inspection on September 17, 1996, and the inspection report was sent to you by letter dated 1

      '

October 4, 1996. An open predecisional enforcement conference was conducted in the Region II office on October 21, 1996, with you and members of your , staff to discuss the apparent violations, the root causes, and your corrective I actions to preclude recurrence. A letter summarizing the conference was sent to you on November 1, 1996.

Based on the information developed during the inspection and the information you provided during the conference, the NRC has determined that violations of NRC requirements occurred. The violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties (Notice) and the circumstances surrounding them are described in detail in the subject inspection report.

Violation A in the enclosed Notice, involves your failure to implement the EQ program in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49. Specifically, numerous deficiencies were identified, some having existed since the EQ program was initially implemented. They involved failures to (1) incorporate appropriate equipment in the EQ program (2) maintain documentation of qualification for safety-related equipment, and (3) maintain EQ equi) ment lists and files accurately. These deficiencies are significant in tlat, collectively, they represent a programmatic breakdown in the implementation of your EQ program. The root causes of Violation A were a lack of management oversight of the program, inadequate turnover of the EQ program implementation from contractors to licensee engineers, and the lack of EQ expertise in your program implementation and oversight. \ Violation B in the enclosed Notice, involves significant failures to implement '

      )

your corrective action program with regard to EQ deficiencies over a long period of time. EQ nonconformances identified as early as 1991 were not properly corrected and EQ deficiencies identified in contractor and 9612030098 961119 PDR ADOCK 05000324 bj ' G PDR

.
. .

CP&L -2 self initiated audits as early as 1994 were closed without adequate resolution, were not placed in appropriate corrective action tracking programs, or remained open with no review of their impact on the EQ program.

' The root causes of this violation included informal followup of issues, inadequate management review of resolution and paper to paper closure of

' issues without ensuring that identified basic program deficiencies were  l corrected.      I At the predecisional enforcement conference you indicated that no equipment operability issues had been identified during your review of the EQ program deficiencies. : That fact notwithstanding, . Violation A is of. significant

regulatory concern because the plant operated for a number of years without l your staff ensuring the environmental qualification of key pieces of equipment

- such that there would be assurance that the equipment would operate if called i upon to function. Therefore, Violation A is classified in accordance with the

" General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions" l '(Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, as a Severity Level III violation. ,

i In addition to these EQ program deficiencies, the NRC is particularly concerned with your historically poor performance:in implementing corrective

     -

"~ actions for EQ program weaknesses, as cited in Violation B. Although you i expended considerable effort for internal and contract assessment of your EQ j program. you failed to follow through to ensure correction of the identified ,

- deficiencies in that program. It is significant that many deficiencies were l

! not entered into corrective action programs and remained uncorrected for a ) number of years; however, it is more significant that: (1) items were closed i . without proper assurance that the deficiencies were corrected,-and' ,

(2) management failed to comprehend the full scope of problems that existed

- and failed to provide necessary direction and focus for the corrective action i efforts. Therefore', Violation B also is classified as a Severity Level III j' violation, in accordance with the Enforcement Policy.

. l In accordance with the. Enforcement Policy, a base civil penalty in the amount J.

of $50,000 is considered for a Severity Level III violation. Because your

facility pas been the subject of escalated enforcement actions within the last i two years., the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for ! Identification and Corrective Action in accordance with the civil analty , . assessment process described in Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement 'olicy. I ! With regard to' Violation A, the NRC concluded that it is not warranted to give ! credit for Identification because the breakdown in the EQ program was L identified by the NRC. With regard to consideration for Corrective Action,

your corrective actions included

(1) reviews of program deficiencies by a relatively large team of licensee and contract employees with expertise in EQ:

< I A Severity Level III violation was issued on July 12.199d. (EA 96181) related to i design control measures for service water system modifications. A Severity Level III violation

was issued on April 4.19%. (EA 96 054) for failure to meet fitness for duty requirements. A

. severity Level III violation was issued on November 20, 1995. (EA 95 228) related to suitability

of materials used in valves in the residual heat removal system. A severity Level III problem 4 was issued on September 8.1995. (EA 95166) related to design control, modification and testing i of the high pressure injection system and reactor core isolation cooling system.

i

     ._,

,

'

n

,
,

CP&L 3-(2) revision of the EQ master list and identification of appropriate performance specifications and environmental conditions: (3) review of testing parameters; (4) staffing and training initiatives: and (5) establishing program audits. Based on the above, the NRC determined that credit was

- warranted for Corrective Action, resulting in a base civil penalty of $50,000 being proposed for Violation A.

Because the NRC identified the violation associated with the corrective action problem cited in Violation B, credit for Identification was not considered appropriate. With regard to consideration for Corrective Action for Violation B, you now require initiation of condition reports for audit findings, formal tracking of followup actions, and documented dispositions of deficiencies. You also now require approval of significant condition reports by a higher level of management. Therefore, the NRC determined that credit was warranted for Corrective Action for Violation B, which would normally result in a civil penalty being assessed at the base amount of $50,000 for thi. violation. However, the NRC is concerned that the historical implementation of your corrective action program was deficient in several key areas. Since 1991, conditions adverse to quality in your EQ program: (1) were poorly tracked. -(2) were closed without properly being dispositioned,- (3) received inadequate management attention, and'(4) were not assessed as-

. indicators of overall. weaknesses in the corrective action program.

Accordingly, in order to stress the significance of the NRC's concern associated with the past breakdown in the implementation-of your. corrective action program, I.have decided to exercise enforcement discretion, in: accordance with Section VII.A of the Enforcement Policy, and escalate the civil penalty for Violation B to twice the base amount for this Severity Level III violation. The civil penalty for Violation B is $100,000.

Therefore, to emphasize the_importance of management oversight of the j implementation of EQ requirements and the need for prompt . identification and' comprehensive correction of conditions _ adverse to quality; and in-consideration of your previous escalated enforcement actions, I have been

- authorized. after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil ,

Penalties (Notice) for the two Severity Level III violations at the base i amount of $50,000 for Violation A and twice the base amount, or $100,000, for ! Violation B. The total civil penalties proposed for this action is $150,000.

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 NRC enforcement action _is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.

     \

,

.

CP&L 4 ,

     ;
     ;

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public , Document Room (PDR). l

Sincerely,

Original Signed by L. A. Reyes Stewart D. Ebneter Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50 325. 50 324 License Nos. DPR 71, DPR 62 j Enclosure: Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties I cc w/ encl: W. Levis, Director Site Operations Brunswick Steam Electric Plant P. O. Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461 R. P. Lopriore Plant Manager Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Light Company P. O. Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461 J. Cowan, Vice President Operations & Environmental Support MS OHS 7 Carolina Power & Light Company P. 0. Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Gerald D. Hicks Manager Regulatory Affairs Carolina Power & Light Company P. O. Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461 cc w/ encl cont'd: (see next page)

, _, CP&L 5 cc w/enci cont'd: W. D. Johnson, Vice President Public Service Commission and Senior Counsel State of South Carolina Carolina Power & Light Company P. O. Box 11649 P. O. Box 1551 Columbia, SC 29211 Raleigh, NC 27602 Jerry W. Jones, Chairman Dayne H. Brown, Director Brunswick County Board of Division of Radiation Protection Commissioners N. C. Department of Environmental P. O. Box 249 Health & Natural Resources Bolvia. NC 28422 P. O. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611 7687 Dan E. Summers Emergency Management Coordinator Karen E. Long New Hanover County Department of Assistant Attorney General Emergency Management State of North Carolina P. O. Box 1525 P. O. Box 629 Wilmington, NC 28402 Raleigh, NC 27602 William H. Crowe, Mayor Robert P. Gruber City of Southport Executive Director 201 East Moore Street Public Staff NCUC Southport, NC 28461 P. O. Box 29520 Raleigh, NC 27626 0520

i l

. t -

       !
       "
.CP&L     6 Distribution w/ enc 1:

PUBLIC JTaylor, ED0 1 JMilhoan, DEDR RZimmerman NRR SEbneter, RII LChandler, 0GC JGoldberg,10GC . JLieberman, OE ) Enforcement Coordinators- l RI, RIII, RIV  ! EHayden. OPA EJordan, AE0D EJulian, SECY BKeeling, CA PRabideau, OC i DDandois. OC  ! GCaputo, 01 i HBell, OIG OE:EA File (B. Summers. OE) 1 (e mail plus 2 letterhead). i MSatorius, OE .! AGibson, RII-JJohnson, RII' CEvans,'RII Buryc, RII . KClark, RII ) RTrojanowski,RII CCasto, RII MShymlock, RII (IFS entry required)

.DTrimble, NRR MMiller, RII       :
       "
-RAiello, RII GHallstrom, RII       ;

NRC Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8470 River Road, SE Southport, NC 28461  ;

       /

SEND TO PtBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM? [ YES l NO / OrFICE RII:DRP RII:k Ril:EIC5j Ril:0RA RII:0RA SIGNATURE ] h

    ~

NAME JJohntarv AGibson . CEvans L 11/[fM

    ~

DATE 11 / /% 11/ h/ % / /% 11//E/% c0Pv7 ('vts ) NO //YI D ND YES N0 f5] l NO YES [[NQ[ -

       " '

0FFICIAL RECORL' COPY DOCUMt.NI NAEVH:\l960PLN.LNt \%3545RU.DIR\mam :.

     . , - . -_

,    11.14.1996 09: 46   p, 3
- i    ;_  \
      --
    '

lg J' - cam 11naPower& Light Company , kg,; DiNtribution w/snel: . PU .IC .

      '
    !

JT lor, EDO JMi hoan, DEOR RZ1 nmerman,'NRR l SE6 1 ster, RII

      .

LCh l JGo'indler, OGC Idberg OGC ' JLibberman,,OE Enfpree m nt Coordinators RI, RIII, RIV i EH61 den, OPA i

     '

EJo adan, AEOD EJulian, SECY , 8Ke bling, CA - PRa >1deau, OC  : 00ahdois, OC GCa >uto 01 . H8e ll,b!G , Oft !AFile(AlsobeE-Mail)

( 1. Summers, OE) (2 letterhead)

MSa torius OE .

     '

AGi pson,kII JJoanson RII , CEv nns,kII i' Burfc kcl nrk,RI! RII RTr4janowski, RI! CCa Ito, RI!  !

     '

NShJmlock,RII(IFSentryrequired) ' DTr imble, NRR MNiller, RII '

     !

RAlollo, RII GHahlstrom, RII

'     ,
     ,

NRC Resident Inspector U.S , Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8470 River Road, SE Sou4hport, NC 28461 l M\ s4, f. \\ ,nNI

  .
   ,
    . >

OEdf HRR Odh _RMI h _D:b bRf MSNorius RZimmerman SEbneter J b rman Ylhoan th A/96 11/(/96 II/n/96 llY6/96 11/6/96 i Doc!Name: 8:\0ECASES\96354 REY.MS I

    ..

}}