ML15224A714
| ML15224A714 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1990 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15224A713 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-90-119, GL-88-14, NUDOCS 9008270250 | |
| Download: ML15224A714 (3) | |
Text
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY Duke Power Company Docket Nos.
50-269, 50-270, and 50-287 Oconee Units 1, 2, and 3 License Nos.
DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 EA 90-119 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted May 20 June 16, 1990, a violation of NRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions,"
10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1990), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (ACT), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular violations and associated civil penalty are set forth below:
I. Violation Assessed a Civil Penalty 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI requires, in part, that measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality be promptly identified and corrected. In the case of significant conditions adverse to quality, the measures shall assure that the cause of the condition is determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition.
Contrary to the above, in 1982, Duke Power failed to take corrective action for a condition adverse to quality even though personnel recognized that a loss of instrument air would prevent operation of the Penetration Room Venti lation System (PRVS), an Engineered Safeguards system, that was required to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Specifically, this condition was documented in a report titled "Loss of Instrument Air," such that for instrument air dropping from 100 to 70 psig, "PR-13 (PR Fan "A" Inlet Control) closes and PR-17 (PR Fan "B" Inlet Control) closes which prevents operation of the Penetration Room Ventilation System." Further, in a 1984 report routed to high level Duke Power management, the licensee referenced the 1982 document and reiterated that a loss of instrument air would prevent operation of the PRVS. Again, in this instance, the licensee failed to take corrective action for the adverse condition. Even though the licensee had at least two other instances in which this adverse condition should have been recognized and corrected (in March 1987 during a design study initiated to identify active valves and in August 1988 during the licensee's review in response to NRC Generic Letter 88-14), the licensee continued to fail to take corrective action for this adverse condition until June 13, 1990, after an NRC Resident Inspector identified the adverse condition.
This is a Severity Level III violation. (Supplement I)
Civil Penalty - $25,000.
II. Violation Not Assessed a Civil Penalty 10 CFR 50.9 requires, in part, that information provided to the Commission by a licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.
9f008:270250 900816.,
DR ADOCC:k 05000270 PDC
- 2 Contrary to the above, information provided to the Commission in the licensee's responses to Generic Letter (GL) 88-14 dated May 8, 1989 and July 20, 1989 was not complete and accurate in all material respects.
The information was not accurate in that it indicated that verifications had been performed for all "active" air operated components. However, verifications had not been performed for two active flow control valves for the PRVS, PR-13 and PR-17, because they had not been properly categorized as "active."
The information was material because it concerned the oper ability of safety-related components.
This is a Severity Level IV violation. (Supplement VII)
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Duke Power Company (Licensee) is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, within 30 days of the date of this Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each alleged violation: (1) admission or denial of the alleged violation, (2) the reasons for the violation if admitted, and if denied, the reasons why, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an
.order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, the Licensee may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft, money order, or electronic transfer payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the amount of the civil penalty proposed above, or the cumulative amount of the civil penalties if more than one civil penalty is proposed, or may protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part, by a written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Should the Licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the civil penalty will be issued.
Should the Licensee elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, in whole or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an "Answer to a Notice of Violation" and may: (1) deny the violations listed in this Notice in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate exten uating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty.
- 3 In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the factors addressed in Section V.B of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1990), should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201, but may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. The attention of the Licensee is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty.
Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282c.
The response noted above (Reply to Notice of Violation, letter with payment of civil penalty, and Answer to a Notice of Violation) should be addressed to:
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility which is the subject of this Notice.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Stewart D. Ebneter Regional Administrator Dated 4t Atlanta, Georgia this /64 day of August 1990