ML16154A632
| ML16154A632 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1994 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Hampton J DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16154A633 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-94-104, NUDOCS 9408090056 | |
| Download: ML16154A632 (7) | |
Text
1-- I1.
"17%1 1 1 4
(NUDOCS OFFSITE FACILITY)
REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9408090056 DOC.DATE: 94/08/02 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET #
CIL: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 Co.
05000287 AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION EBNETER,S.D.
Region 2 (Post 820201)
RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION HAMPTON,J.W.
Duke Power Co.
SUBJECT:
Forwards notice of violation & proposed imposition of civil penalty in amount of $15,000.Enforcement conference conducted on 940629 to discuss violation,cause & corrective actions to preclude recurrence.
DISTRIBUTION CODE: IE01D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL SIZE:
TITLE: General (50 Dkt)-Insp Rept/Notice of Vi6lation Response NOTES:
RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL PD2-3 PD 1
1 WIENS,L 1
1 INTERNAL: ACRS 2
2 AEOD/DEIB 1
1 AEOD/DSP/ROAB 1
1 AEOD/DSP/TPAB 1
1 AEOD/TTC 1
1 DEDRO 1
1 NRR/DORS/OEAB 1
1 NRR/DRCH/HHFB 1
1 NRR/PMAS/IRCB-E 1
- 1.
NUDOCS-ABSTRACT 1
1 OE DIR 1
1 OGC/HDS2 1
1 ILE 02 1
1 RES/HFB 1
1 RGN2 FILE 01 1
1 EXTERNAL: EG&G/BRYCE,J.H.
1 1
-NRC PDR 1
1 NSIC 1
1 NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WNASTE! CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK, ROOM Pl-37 (EXT 504-2083) TO ELIMINATE YOUR NAME FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS FOR DOCUMENTS YOU DON'T NEED!
- C OTE O L
NUBRIDS CPIES:OIE:LTR 2
NL 2
AUG 2 1994 Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, DPR-55 EA 94-104 Duke Power Company ATTN: Mr. J. W. Hampton Vice President Oconee Site Post Office Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY
- $15,000 (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-269/94-16, 50-270/94-16 AND 50-287/94-16)
This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted by Mr. P. Harmon on May 1 - June 4, 1994, at the Oconee facility. The inspection included, in part, a review of the facts and circumstances related to two instances of inadequate control over refueling activities. The report documenting the inspection was sent to you by letter dated June 16, 1994.
During the inspection, violations of NRC requirements were identified. An enforcement conference was conducted in the NRC Region II office on June 29, 1994, to discuss the violation, the cause, and your corrective actions to preclude recurrence. A summary of this conference was sent to you by letter dated July 13, 1994.
The violation described in Part I of the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) involved the failure to implement procedural requirements related to the identification and independent verification of fuel assembly location during movement of fuel from the spent fuel pool to the Unit 1 reactor core. This resulted in a fuel assembly being retrieved from the wrong spent fuel pool location and subsequently placed in the reactor core. The error was discovered by your staff later in the refueling sequence. The NRC considers your failure to implement adequate corrective action for previous violations in the area of refueling operations as a root cause of the current violation. Although improvements have been made in the methods for controlling fuel assembly movements since problems were identified in 1990, the fact that this violation is the fourth occurrence of failure to identify and verify fuel assembly locations is a matter of regulatory concern.
This violation is similar to three previous violations identified since October 1990. NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-269, 270 and 287/90-30, issued on November 21, 1990, included a Severity Level IV violation for failure to implement refueling procedures that resulted in a fuel assembly being placed in the wrong location in the core. NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-269, 270, and 287/91-18, issued on September 17, 1991, included a Severity Level IV violation for failure to implement refueling procedures that resulted in a 9408090056 940802 PDR ADOCK 05000269 Q
Duke Power Company
- 2 _
m 2
99A fuel assembly being placed in the wrong location in the spent fuel pool.
The cover letter transmitting this inspection report identified the violation as a recurring violation with similar root causes and stated that the violation was not escalated due to the event's low safety significance. NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-269, 270, and 287/93-03, issued on February 22, 1993, included a Severity Level IV violation involving two examples of failure to implement refueling procedures that resulted in two fuel assemblies being placed in the wrong location in the core. Again, the cover letter transmitting the inspection report identified the violation as a recurring violation and stated that enforcement action was not escalated because of your identification and correction of the errors and the event's low consequence to safety.
The NRC is concerned that the corrective actions implemented in response to previously identified problems were not effective in preventing this current violation of refueling requirements. The previous violations were caused by communication errors between the spent fuel bridge operator and the spent fuel bridge spotter, trolley positioning errors, and the failure of the bridge operator and spotter to do an adequate self-check and independent verification of the trolley position. The current violation was also caused by inadequate self-check and independent verification of the trolley position. Your March 23, 1993 commitment, in response to Violation 269, 287/93-03-01, issued on February 22, 1993, indicated that you would clarify the refueling procedure to assure that an adequate independent verification of the fuel assembly position would be performed. This included independent verification by an individual who had not been given prior notification of the position of the fuel assembly. However, you indicated at the enforcement conference that in the current case the independent verifier, i.e., the spotter, may have been able to overhear the communications to the bridge operator identifying the fuel assembly location. We have concluded that this contributed to the failure of the spotter to properly perform independent verification of the location of the fuel assembly. In addition, lack of attention to detail on the part of the bridge operator and the spotter contributed to the event.
The NRC recognizes that you took corrective action, after identification of the mispositioned fuel assembly, as discussed during the enforcement conference. These corrective actions included relocating the mispositioned fuel assembly to achieve the correct core configuration, revising the refueling procedure to further define steps to assure that the trolley is correctly positioned and training the appropriate personnel on the event and the procedure changes.
The NRC normally does not consider monetary civil penalties for Severity Level IV violations. However,Section VI.B of the Enforcement Policy provides for such penalties when a licensee has not implemented effective corrective action for previous similar violations. Although the NRC does not often propose civil penalties in these cases, the staff finds that a civil penalty for repetitive Severity Level IV violations is warranted in this case because the errors in placement of the fuel assembly in the Unit 1 reactor core could have been prevented had adequate corrective actions been implemented to O
correct the underlying cause of previously identified violations. While it is recognized that the likelihood of a signifcant safety consequence from this matter is low, fuel handling is an activity that requires attention to detail, as does all activities affecting nuclear operations. Your performance has indicated that attention to detail in this activitiy was not acceptable.
Duke Power Company AUb 2 I99A To emphasize the importance of maintaining control over refueling activities and to emphasize that corrective actions must be effective in precluding the occurrence of similar violations, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) in the amount of
$15,000 for the repeat Severity Level IV violation set forth in Part I of the enclosed Notice. The base value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level IV violation is $15,000. The Enforcement Policy provides that civil penalties for Severity Level IV violations are normally proposed at the base value without applying the civil penalty adjustment factors.
The violation described in Part II of the Notice involved an inadequate procedure for the control of fuel assembly movement during the Unit 1 reactor core reload. The procedure, OP/1/A/1502/07, "Refueling Procedure," was not adequate because it provided the refueling crew with neither specific guidance nor detailed steps with respect to refueling sequence deviations to support nuclear instrumentation testing during the reload of the reactor core. This violation is of concern because documentation and procedural control of the movement of fuel at all times is considered essential to preclude inadvertent damage of fuel assemblies, unanalyzed interim fuel assembly configurations, and placement of fuel assemblies in incorrect core locations. In this case, your staff was aware of an engineering memorandum requesting refueling sequence deviations to your core reloading procedure 22 days prior to the start of reload activities. Despite this knowledge, the procedure was not changed. Additionally, OP/1/A/1502/07 utilized broad and nonspecific direction that permitted the refueling senior reactor operator to alter the planned and proceduralized refueling sequence, if necessary. The terms "alter the planned refueling sequence" and "if necessary" were not defined in the procedure. The use of nondescriptive and vague terms, such as the "if necessary" portion of the refueling procedure, as guidance for licensed operators responsible for correctly placing fuel in the reactor core has the potential for errors and could unduly place an additional burden on the refueling personnel.
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 NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). Accordingly, your response should not to the extent possible, include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be released to the public and placed in the PDR without redaction. However, if you find it necessary to include such information, you should clearly indicate the specific information you believe should not be placed in the PDR, and provide the legal basis to support your request for withholding the information from the public.
Duke Power Company AUG 2
!S,"
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.
Sincerely, SLuis A Royd Stewart D.-Ebneter Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty cc w/encl:
Mr. Steve Benesole Compliance Duke Power Company P.
- 0.
Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679 Mr. A. V. Carr, Esq.
Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242-0001 Mr. Robert P. Gruber Executive Director Public Staff - NCUC P. 0. Box 29520 Raleigh, NC 27626-0520 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock and Wilcox Company Nuclear Power Generation Division 1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 Rockville, MD 20852 cc w/encl cont'd: (See page 5)
SEND OFC RII:D RII:DRS RII:ORA RII:EICS RII:ORA TO NAME h
AGibson c
LRe DAT 07/27 /94 07/Z7/940 2-1/94 07/ ;2/94
/ 9 No CO ?
Yes No Yes Yes/
No Yes No Yes OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME:
H:\\9416ZOC.DIR\\FINALSDE
Duke Power Company
- 5 cc w/encl cont'd:
Mr. J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, D. C. 20005 Office of Intergovernmental Relations 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Mr. Max Batavia, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 Manager, LIS NUS Corporation 2650 McCormick Drive Clearwater, FL 34619-1035 Mr. G. A.
Copp Licensing - ECO50 Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1006 Charlotte, NC 28201-1006 Ms. Karen E. Long Assistant Attorney General N. C. Department of Justice P. 0. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602
Duke Power Company 6-2 bcc w/encl:
- JTaylor, EDO
- JMilhoan, DEDR SEbneter, RH JLieberman, OE JGoldberg, OGC RZimmerman, NRR WRussell, NRR Enforcement Coordinators RI, RIII, RIV, WCFO JFitzgerald, 01 EJordan, AEOD DWilliams, 0IG MSatorius, OE EA File DCS AGibson, RH MSinkule, RH
. KClark, RII BUryc, RH LWiens, NRR RCarroll, RH MSinkule, RH Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 2, Box 610 Seneca, SC 29672