ML17252A628
| ML17252A628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/1990 |
| From: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17202U887 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-90-168, NUDOCS 9012060126 | |
| Download: ML17252A628 (3) | |
Text
NOTICE OF-VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION -OF CIVIL PENALTY Commonwealth Edi son Docket Nds.. 50~237 and 50-249 Dresden Nuclear fo~er Station
- License Nos.
DPR-19.ahd DPR-25 EA 90-168 During NRC.inspections conducted on June 13 through JuJy 31, 1990 and Ju~e 28 through September 20,.1990, a vio~ation of NRC requirements was identified~.
- In-accordance* with the "General Statement of Pcilicy ~nd Procedure for NRC
. Enforcement Actions/' 10 CFR Part 2,. _Appendix C (1990)*~ the Nuclear Regulatory
- Comniissi6n 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 violation. arid associated civil pen"alty is set_forth below:.
10 CF~ 50.59(a) states, in pari, that a holder of.a license may make chari~es 1n
- _the facility as described.in the safety analysis report without prior Commission.
approval unles~ the* proposed change involves a change in th~ technical ~pecifi tati-ons incorporated,'in the license or an unreviewed safety questio*n.
It al.so,
st~tes, in part; that a. piopose~ change shal.l b~ deemed to invo~ve ~n unr~viewed. **
safety question if the margin of safety as d~fined in the basis for. any technical specification-is reduced.
SectiOn 14.2.6.4~1 of the.Final S?fety Analysis Report (FSAR) states*, in part~.
. that the Air Sample System be configured such that the "air sample will be drawn...
through the.tubing, out through a drywell penetratjon, auto.-isolation v*alves, and then to a continuous air, monitor."
- .Section 14.2A.2~C of the Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR), which discusses offsite dos~ releases following a Loss of Coolant Atcident [LOCA),
st~tes,**in
- part, that the primary containment leaks 0.5 percent of the.contained free*
- volume per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at 25 psig.
Section 14.2.4.3 of the USAR, which discusses
~ost-LOCA control room dose rates, states, in part, that activity releases are ba~ed o~ ~ contairimerit leakage rate of 1.6 percerit per day~
. Technical Specification 3~7.A.2.a(3) states that the maximu_m allowable leakage rate at a pressure of Pa, La, is equal to 1.6 percent by weight of the contain-ment air per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at 48 psig. *The bases for the surveillance requirements* *.
- .for Section 3.7.A.2 explain that the m_aximum allowable *test leak rate (1.6% was derived from the maximum allowable accident l~ak rate of abotit 2 percent/day~
when corrected for the effects of containment environment Onder accident and test conditions.
The bases additionally state that the atcident leak rate could be allowed tci increase to about 3.2 percen~/day before the guidelirie thyroid doses value given in 10 CFR 100 wo*uld be exceeded, so that establfsh1ng* the test limit of 1.6 percent/day provides an adequate ma~gin of ~afety to assur~
the health and safety. bf the general public.
9012060126 90112$
~DR- _ADOCK 05000237 PNU
'*"1
- \\
Notice of Violation* Contrary to the abov_e, the licensee, without prior -Commissfon approval,. on a sporadic basis since 1978 and on an almost daily basis from 1987 up to discovery in June 1990, made changes to.the facility as described above in the safety analysis report (automatic isolation was not provided during cdnta~nment air samplin~) that involved a ~hange to the Technical Specifications {TSs) and constituted.an unreviewed safety question.. Speci fi ca lly, use of a temporary sample pump to obtain the required daily dry.well air sample would have involved.
a cnange to the TSs in that the maximum allowable leakage rate *(1.6 percent/day)..
- would have been increased by 4.73 percent/day for a total leakage of.approxi-mately 6*.33 percent/day.
Use of the temporary sample pump constituted an unreviewed saf~ty question in that this amount exceeded the le~kage specified in the bases for the above TS s~ction, such that.. the margin of safety defined th~rein was eliminated.
This is a Severity Level III. v-iolation (Supplemen,t:I)
- Ci v.il Penalty -:-. $37, ~oo.
-~Pursuant to the provisions of lb CFR 2.2oi, C6nvnonwealth Edison Company.
(Licens.ee) is hereby required to submit a written -stateme:nt ofexplanati'bn_to
- the.. Director, Office of Enforcement~ U.S. Nuclear Regulatory_ Corru:nissi~n-, wifhin
- ~ 30 days of the date of this Notice of Violatfbri arid Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice).. *This reply shoul,d be clearly.marked as a "Reply to a.Notice.
- of Violation" and should include for each alleged _vio'lation:
(1) admission or denial *of.the alleged violation, (2) the.reasons for the violatio.n if admitted,
- .and ~f denied, the.reasons why, (3} the corrective steps that hav~ been taken~.
and the results achieyed, (4) the.corrective ~teps that will be taken to avoid ~
~-
further violations, and (5) the 'date when full. C011Jp.liance* will.be achieved.
~f an adequate reply is: not reteived within the time specified in this Notice; a~
- o~der may be issued.to, show. cause.why. the license should. not be modified, suspehded,,6r revoked or why such oth~r actions as may be prbper.should not be taken.
Consideration may be given to extending the respohse ti~e 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.
~iithin the same time as. provided for.the response require*d. under 10 CFR 2.201, the Licensee may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director,
- Office of Enforcement, U.S~ Nuc-lear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft,.
. monej 6rder,.or electronic transfer payable to the Treasurer of the United
.,')!.
- r *.
... ~.
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 protes*t imposition of the civil penalty ii:i whole or in part, by a written answer*
- addressed to the Dfrec.tor, Office of Enforcement, U. S. Nuclear Re.gulatory..
- Commission.
Should the Licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the* civil penalty will be issu-ed. *Should the Licensee -elect to.
file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, in wh6le or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an "Answer to a Notice of Violation" and may:
(1) deny the violation listed in this Notice _in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumst~nces, (3} show error iri this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed.
I.n addition to protesting_the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer maf request remission or mitigation of the penalty.
Nritice of ~iolation
- In requesting mitigation of*the proposed penalty, the factors addres*sed 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 frqm the statement or explan*ation 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 pag~ and paragraph numbers) to av6id repetition.
The atterition of th~ Licensee i~ directed.to the other provisions of 10 CFR.2.205, regarding tb~ procedure for imposing a civil penalty.
Upon.failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been determine*d
- in accrirdance with the applicable-provisions of 10 CFR 2.205,.this matter maj be
-~eferred to the Attprney General, and the penalty, uriless compromised, remitted, or mitigatEd, may be.collected by ci~il action pursuaht to Section.~34c of the
- Act, 4_2. U.S. C. 2282c. -.
Th~ response* noted above (Reply to Notice of Vi~lation, letter with payment of.
civil a~d A~swer to a Notice of Violation) should be addr~ssed to:
Di~ector,*
Office* of.Enforcement, U.S *. Nuclear Regulatory Cpmmission, ATTN:
Document Contrpl Desk, Washington,' D.C. 205.. 55 w.ith a copy. to the Regional Administrator;
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CoITTTiission~ Region III, 799 Roosevelt Road, (;len Ellyn, Ill_ino_is 60137~ and a copy to the**NRC Resident Inspector a_t the Dresden Nuclear
~ower Statiofl.
- ~,_
FOR.THE NUCLEA~ ~EGULATORY COMMISSION
~.
- .: WJ ~
- _:. ;,." p*
- c*
., A. Bert.Davi.. *.* 1
,~.: _. Regionar Administrator.
Dated at Glen Ellyn, Illinois this 28th day of November 1990
- .