IR 05000454/1997001

Forwards Insp Repts 50-454/97-01 & 50-455/97-01 on 970527-0605.Five Apparent Violations Identified & Being Considered for Escalated Ea.Predecisional Enforcement Conference Scheduled for 970905

ML20151J942
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	07/25/1997
From:	Grant G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Graesser K COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML20151J946	List: IR 05000454/1997001 ML20151J960
References
50-454-97-09, 50-454-97-9, 50-455-97-07, 50-455-97-7, EA-97-264, NUDOCS 9708050290
Download: ML20151J942 (5)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:-- .. . - - - . _ . - - ~ -. .- . . _ , e" "'%,

      ?uuie. \

UNITED STATES

 %,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

;  %   REGION lli g_g
. %? 4j  801 WARRENVILLE ROAD g  USLE. ILUNOIS 60532-4351
...**

July 25, 1997

       '
       \

I  ! EA 97-264 Mr. ! Site Vice President Byron Station i Commonwealth Edison Company 4450 N. German Church Road Byron, IL 61010 SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-454/97009(DRP); 50-455/97009(DRP)

Dear Mr. Graesser:

On June 5,1997, the NRC completed a specialinspection at your Byron 1 & 2 reactor

       ;

facilities. The inspection focused on the circumstances involving the failure to vent the chemical and volume control (CV) system in accordance with the technical specifications (TS) surveillance requirements. Also inspected was the performance of surveillances in general and the operability assessment process when surveillances identify problems / concerns.

On May 22,1997, the inspectors identified that Byron was not in strict compliance with the TS due to the failure to vent the CV pump casings and discharge piping high points.  ! Although your staff considered all the CV pumps to be operable, both trains of the CV system for both units were declared inoperable following several conference calls between the site, the NRC Region ill office, and the office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). On May 23,1997, a Notice of Enforcement Discretion (NOED) was requested by your staff i and a TS change request was submitted. After review of the requests by the NRC staff, the NOED was granted on May 24,1997, and the TS change request was under review.

. Further review of TS surveillance requirements by the inspectors identified another example of failure to comply with TS venting requirements where your staff failed to vent ; a residual heat removal (RH) system high point. Concurrently, your staff reviewed other ' TS surveillances and identified two additional instances when TS requirements were not met. Specifically, slave relay testing for 10 phase "A" containment isolation valves had not been performed. Again, your staff incorrectly evaluated, through two onsite reviews, that the TS requirements for these valves were met. ,

       !

Based on the results of this inspection, five apparent violations of NRC requirements were identified and are being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions"  ! ! (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600.

\ oq3ngi M 9708050290 970725

   [[ElElEllE!EVI!!!H!l PDR ADOCK 05000454
.O  (PD

i ! . Collectively, the apparent violations demonstrate a failure to perform TS surveillances and , to recognize that the plant must be operated in strict compliance with the TS surveillance l requirements. Three of the apparent violations involve instances where your staff incorrectly evaluated the TS non-compliances through operability assessments or onsite reviews. Although the evaluations concluded that the affected components were operable, there was no recognition that TS surveillance requirements were not being met.

The details pertaining to each apparent violation are described in the enclosed report.

No Notice of Violation (NOV) is presently being issued for these inspection findings. In addition, the number and characterization of apparent violations described in the enclosed inspection report rpay change as a result of further NRC review.

A predecisional enforcement conference to discuss the apparent violations has been scheduled for September 5,1997, at 10:00 a.m. in the Region 111 office in Lisle, Illinois.

This meeting will be open to the public. The decision to hold a pre-decisional enforcement ' conference does not mean that the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This conference is being held to obtain information to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision, including a common understanding of l the facts and circumstances surrounding the violations, their root causes, your  ; opportunities to identify the apparent violations sooner, your corrective actions, and the significance of the issues.

l In addition, this is an opportunity for you to point out any errors in our inspection report and for you to provide any information concerning your perspectives on: 1) the severity of , the violations, 2) the application of the factors that the NRC considers when it determines l the amount of a civil penalty that may be assessed in accordance with Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy, and 3) any other application of the Enforcement Policy to this case, including the exercise of discretion in accordance with Section Vll.

You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. No response regarding these apparent violations is required at this time.

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

Sincerely, /s/ R. N. Gardner for l Geoffrey E. Grant, Director, Division of Reactor Projects ! Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 l License Nos. NPF-37; NPF-66 i Enclosure: Inspection Report 50-454/455/97009(DRP) PLEASE SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES PLEASE SEE ATTACHED DESTNBUTMN h r-ceive a copy of this document, indicate in the bom "C" = Copy wethout attach /enci "E" = Copy wrth attach /enci "N" = No copy

"::27 OFFICE Ril  Hil  Rll   Ril NAME Tongualco  Clayton  Lanksbury  Grant DATE 7/ /97  7/ /97  7f 19 7  7/ 19 7 OFFICIAL RECORD LOPY l

.. . __ _ .-   -. .-
.

l K. Gresss:r -2- ! . l Collectively, the apparent violations demonstrate a failure to perform TS surveillances and to recognize that the plant must be operated in strict compliance with the TS surveillance requirements. Two of the apparent violations or examples involve instances where your I staff incorrectly evaluated the TS non-compliances through operability assessments or ! onsite reviews. Although the evaluations concluded that the affected components were operable, there was no recognition that TS surveillance requirements were not being met.

The details pertaining to each apparent violation are described in the enclosed report.

No Notice of Violation (NOV) is presently being issued for these inspection findings. In addition, the number and characterization of apparent violations described in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further NRC review.

A predecisional enforcement conference to discuss the apparent violations has been scheduled for September 5,1997, at 10:00 a.m. in the Region 111 office in Lisle, Illinois.

This meeting will be open to the public. The decision to hold a pre-decisional enforcement 1 conference does not mean that the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This conference is being held to obtain information to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision, including a common understanding of the facts and circumstances surrounding the violations, their root causes, your opportunities to identify the apparent violations sooner, your corrective actions, and the significance of the issues.

In addition, this is an opportunity for you to point out any errors in our inspection report and for you to provide any information concerning your perspectives on: 1) the severity of the violations, 2) the application of the factors that the NRC considers when it determines the amount of a civil penalty that may be assessed in accordance with Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy, and 3) any other application of the Enforcement Policy to this case, including the exercise of discretion in accordance with Section Vll.

You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. No response regarding these apparent violations is required at this time.

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

Sincerely,

l Geoffrey E. Grant, Director, l Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 License Nos. NPF-37; NPF-66 l

Enclosure: Inspection Report 50-454/455/97009(DRP) PLEASE $EE ATTACHED 948TNpVT10N To receive e copy of ens document. md.cate m the box *C" = Copy without ettech/enct *E" = Copy with attach /enci "N" = No copy ' OFFICE mu nu h mil ( Ril h NAME Tongue /co Clayton {pd -- Lenk Grant h j DATE 7/ 19 7 71 *l [ /9 7 7/ /97 7/ 19 7 OFF;CIAL HECORD LOPY ! I

c

-

}}