ML15118A230
| ML15118A230 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1997 |
| From: | Reyes L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Mccollum W DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15118A231 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-97-05, 50-269-97-5, 50-270-97-05, 50-270-97-5, 50-287-97-05, 50-287-97-5, NUDOCS 9707310092 | |
| Download: ML15118A230 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000269/1997005
Text
CATEGORY 2
REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9707310092
DOC.DATE: 97/07/18 NOTARIZED: NO
DOCKET #
FACIL:50-269 Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Duke Power Co.
05000269
50-270 Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Duke Power Co.
05000270
50-287 Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 3, Duke Power Go.
05000287
UTH.NAME
AUTHOR AFFILIATION
YES,L.A.
Region 2 (Post 820201)
RECIP.NAME
RECIPIENT AFFILIATION
MCCOLLUM,W.R.
Duke Power Co.
SUBJECT: Forwards insp rept 50-269/97-05,50-270/97-05
& 50-287/97-05
C
on 970504-0618 & NOV.
DISTRIBUTION CODE: IE01F COPIES' RECEIVED:LTR I ENCL _
SIZE:
TITLE: General (50 Dkt)-Insp Rept/Notice of Violation Response
T
NOTES:
E
RECIPIENT
COPIES
RECIPIENT
COPIES
G
ID CODE/NAME
LTTR ENCL
ID CODE/NAME
LTTR ENCL
PD2-2 PD
1
1
LABARGE,D
1
1
0
INTERNAL: ACRS
2
2
AEOD/SPD/RAB
1
1
R
Azoalrl-
1
DEDRO
1
1
d
E ENTER
1
1
NRR/DISP/PIPB
1
1
Y
NFB
1
1
NRR/DRPM/PECB
NRR/DRPM/PERB
1
1
NUDOCS-ABSTRACT
1
1
OE DIR
1
1
OGC/HDS2
1
2
RGN2
FILE
01
1
1
NAL: LITCO BRYCE,J H
1
1
NOAC
1
1
NRC PDR
1
1
NUDOCS FULLTEXT
1
1
D
C
U
E
1
1 OGC/HDS
NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE.
TO HAVE YOUR NAME OR ORGANIZATION REMOVED FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS
OOR
REDUCE THE NUMBER OF. COPIES RECEIVED BY. YOU OR YOUR ORGANIZATION,
CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL
DESK (DCD) ON EXTENSION 415-2,083
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR
20
ENCL
20
July 18, 1997
EA 97-324
Duke Power Company
ATTN: Mr. W. R. McCollum
Vice President
Oconee Nuclear Station
P. 0. Box 1439
Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND EXERCISE OF ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION
(NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-269/97-05, 50-270/97-05, AND
50-287/97-05)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
On June 18. 1997, the NRC completed an inspection at your Oconee Nuclear
Station. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.
During the inspection, the NRC examined the facts and circumstances
surrounding Duke Power Company's (DPC) identification that certain portions of
the low pressure service water (LPSW) system piping did not meet their design
.basis.
Specifically, on April 26, 1997, during a review resulting from the
Service Water Upgrade Project, your staff determined that certain LPSW piping
associated with Units 1 and 2 did not meet the separation and/or shielding
criteria for withstanding high trajectory turbine-generated missiles as
provided for in the Oconee Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The
condition was reported to the NRC on April 26, 1997, and Licensee Event Report
50-269/97-005 was submitted on May 27, 1997. In addition, on April 29, 1997,
DPC submitted a request for changes to the Oconee Operating Lice'nse to permit
use of the turbine missile design guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 1.115,
"Protection Against Low Trajectory Missiles," and NUREG-0800, "Standard Review
Plan."
The amendment was approved by the NRC on May 16, 1997, with no plant
modifications required.
Based on the information developed during the inspection, the NRC has
determined that a violation of NRC requirements occurred. As described in
detail in the enclosed inspection report, since initial plant operation, the
facility was not operated as described in the Section 3.1.40 of the UFSAR in
that two portions of the LPSW system piping associated with Units 1 and 2 were
not sufficiently separated or shielded to protect against loss of redundant
LPSW system trains given a postulated high trajectory turbine missile. No
evaluation was performed pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 to determine if the actual
configuration constituted an Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ), although after
your recent discovery of the condition you did confirm that a USQ existed.
The failure of the UFSAR to accurately reflect the as-built plant
configuration and the failure to perform an evaluation in accordance with
10 CFR 50.59 constitutes a violotion of regulatory requirements.
9707310092 970718
\\
ADOCK 05000269
F
G
OFFICIAL COPY
4
2
In
accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedures for
Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, this violation normally
would be categorized as a Severity Level III violation. However, as provided
in Section VII.B.3 of the Enforcement Policy, the NRC may refrain from issuing
a Notice of Violation (Notice) and proposing a civil penalty for a Severity
Level III violation which involves a past problem, such as an old engineering,
design, or installation deficiency, provided that certain criteria are met.
After review of this violationjand consultation with the Director, Office of
Enforcement, the NRC has concluded that while a violation did occur,
enforcement discretion is warranted and issuance of a Notice is not
appropriate in this case. The specific bases for the decision to exercise
enforcement discretion are: (1)
you identified the violation during a design
review associated with LPSW modifications; (2)
the deficiency was not likely
to be identified through routine surveillance or audit activities; (3)
the
issue was appropriately reported in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73;
(4)
prompt actions were taken to initiate a license amendment in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.59(c) and 50.90 to permit consideration of vulnerable target
area and probability of impact of a turbine missile prior to mandating
shielding or separation protection for equipment: and (5)
the overall scope of
your UFSAR reviews associated with other ongoing plant modifications.
Accordingly, this apparent violation, which is identified in the enclosed
inspection report, is considered closed.
During the 6-week period covered by this inspection, your.conduct of
activities at the Oconee Nuclear Station was generally characterized by safety
conscious Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering practices. However, in
addition to the apparent violation discussed above, four additional violations
of regulatory requirements were identified. These four violations are cited
in the enclosed Notice of Violation, and the circumstances surrounding the
violations are described in detail in the enclosed report. The corrective
action violation involving the return of High Pressure Injection pump 3A and
its repaired mini-flow orifice assembly to service prior to meeting the non
destructive weld examination requirements of the applicable code case is
considered repetitive, in that, it is similar to previously cited Violation
50-269,270,287/96-17-09. Repetitive violations are addressed in the NRC's
"Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement
Policy), NUREG-1600,Section IV.B. The Enforcement Policy allows the severity
level of a violation to be increased if the violation can be considered
repetitive. For example, a Severity Level IV violation could be increased to
Severity Level III with the attending escalated enforcement action. However,
in this case, we have decided not to increase the severity level of this
violation based on the low safety significance (i.e., the subject weld was
subsequently found to be acceptable) and your overall satisfactory performance
in this area.
Please note that you are required to respond to this letter and should follow
the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your
response.
No formal response regarding the closure of the apparent violation
is required. The NRC will use your response, in part, to determine whether
Ofurther enforcement action is
necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory
requi rements.
3
.In
accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of
this letter, its enclosures, and your response will be placed in the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR).
Sincerely,
Orig signed by Luis A. Reyes
Luis A. Reyes
Regional Administrator
Docket Nos.: 50-269. 50-270, 50-287, 72-04
License Nos.: DPR-38, DPR-47, DPR-55, SNM-2503
Enclosures: 1. Notice of Violation
2. Inspection Report No. 50-269/97-05.
50-270/97-05 and 50-287/97-05
cc w/encls:
Mr. J. E. Burchfield
Mr. Max Batavia Chief
Compliance
Bureau of Radiological Health
Duke Power Company
South Carolina Department of Health
P. 0. Box 1439
and Environmental Control
Seneca, SC 29679
2600 Bull Street
-I.
Columbia, SC 29201
Mr. Paul R. Newton
Legal Department (PB05E)
County Supervisor of
Duke Power Company
Oconee County
422 South Church Street
Walhalla, SC 29621
Charlotte, NC 28242-0001
Manager, LIS
Mr. Robert P. Gruber
NUS Corporation
Executive Director
2650 McCormick Drive
Public Staff - NCUC
Clearwater, FL 34619-1035
P. 0. Box 29520
Raleigh, NC 27626-0520
Mr. G. A. Copp
Licensing - ECO50
Mr. Robert B. Borsum
Duke Power Company
Framatome Technologies
P. 0. Box 1006
.1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525
Charlotte, NC 28201-1006
Rockville, MD 20852
Ms. Karen E. Long
Mr. J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Winston and Strawn
N. C. Department of Justice
1400 L Street, NW
P. 0. Box 629
Washington, D. C. 20005
Raleigh, NC 27602
Distribution:
(See page 4)
4
Distribution:
L. LaBarge, NRR
R. Carroll, RII
S. Shaeffer, RII
C. Payne, RII
J. Lieberman, OE
NRC Resident Inspector
PUBLIC
OFFICF
_
R
-Q-0CNFF
RTIDRP
MTTARP-0CONFF
RTT-DRS
RTT-nRS
SIGNATURE
NAME MScott*
"SS HAEFFER
DBILLIING
DOEGIRARD
DATE
07-
/
97
07 /
/
0
97
07
97
07 / 14i/ 97
07-/
/ 97
07
COP Y?
NO
E
NO
YES
NO )
NO IYES
NO
YES
NO
O--FFICI\\LRECLURU
COPY
DOCUMEN1 NAME: G:\\ONS9/-0b.WP
OFFTFF
IT-F
RT T*DRe
RTIORS a
RTT-nP
t
RTTI DRP/
SIGNATURE
NAME
BY
R:
R BAU)WIN
f
U
Jeonson
- 4 mv
DATE
0
/ 97
07 /1
/ 97
07
/97
07
0/7--J4
07 / 1/
97
07 /
/97
COPY?
NO
YE
NO
ES/
NO
YES
YES
NO
-Y)
NO
OFFIL
T
RD7CPY
DUCUMENT NAML:
\\0NS97-0.WP