ML17342A794

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Insp Repts 50-250/87-14,50-251/87-14 & Augmented Insp Rept 50-251/87-16 on 870309-0427 & Forwards Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty
ML17342A794
Person / Time
Site: Turkey Point  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 07/21/1987
From: Grace J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Woody C
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML17342A795 List:
References
EA-87-097, EA-87-97, NUDOCS 8707290031
Download: ML17342A794 (8)


See also: IR 05000250/1987014

Text

JUL21 1987

Docket Nos.

50-250,

50-251

License

Nos.

DPR-31,

DPR-41

EA 87-97

,Florida Power

and Light Company

4TTN:

Mr.

C. 0.

Woody

Group Vice President

Nuclear Energy Department

P.

0.

Box 14000

Juno

Beach,

FL

33408

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED

IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY

(NRC INSPECTION

REPORT

NOS.

50-250/87-14

AND 50-251/87-14;

AND NRC AUGMENTED INSPECTION TEAM REPORT

NO 50-251/87-16)

This refers to the

NRC inspection

conducted

March

9 through April 27,

1987,

and

the

NRC Augmented Inspection

Team (AIT) review of the Unit 4 Instrumentation

Port Column leakage

conducted

March 19 through

May 5, 1987, at the Turkey Point

Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4, Homestead,

Florida.

Details of these

inspections

were provided to you by letters

dated

May 21,

1987 and

May 15, 1987, respect-

ively, and indicated significant NRC-identified failures to comply with NRC

requirements.

The violations associated

with the above inspections

were

discussed

at an enforcement

conference

held on June 5, 1987, at the Region II

Office, Atlanta,-Georgia.

Violation I.A described in the enclosed

Notice of Violation and Proposed

Imposition of Civil Penalty addresses

the failure to adequately

evaluate

and

correct

a reactor coolant leak from a Unit 4 instrument port column fitting

that was identified during a licensee

inspection

conducted

on August'0,

1986.

FPLL management

chose to authorize operation for a six-month period,

based

on

an engineering safety evaluation which was hastily reviewed

and subsequently

determined to not have appropriately

assessed

the probable corrosive effects

of boric acid residue

on ferritic steel

reactor

components.

This resulted in

the substantial

corrosion of some reactor

vessel

head closure

components.

Further,

on October 24, 1986,

FP8L had

an opportunity to repair the Conoseal

fitting when the reactor

was shut

down for another

reason.

Your preliminary

inspection

showed that the reactor coolant leak remained

and boric acid was

accumulating

on and around the vessel

head area.

However, the boric acid was

cleaned

up by maintenance

personnel prior to an inspection

by Engineering.

This

Engineering inspection failed to consider the poteritial for widespread effects

of leakage

in the head area

beyond the readily accessible,

visible areas.

FP8L

management

continued to rely on the ini'tial faulty safety evaluation

and

determination that the situation

was acceptable

for continued operations.

Management

decisions

were

made with lack of adequate

information concerning

the scope of the potential

problem.

The plant was allowed to start

up in

CERTIFIED MAIL~

RE

UEETEU

870m9OoSC

S7Om~

PDR

ADOCK 05000250

9

PDR

JUL 2 p eggy

Florida Power and Light Company

- 2

August 1986,

and to restart in October 1986,

even though information regarding

the effects of boric acid leaks

was documented

in several

previous

NRC and

INPO Notices.

While the actual

corrosion

damage

found in April 1987 did not cause

components

to be operated

beyond design conditions or limits, continued operation in this

leakage

environment could have posed

an unwarranted

degradation

of an important

barrier to the potential release

of fission products to the environment.

There-

fore, this violation is considered significant because it illustrates the fail-

ure of licensee

management

and the operating staff to fully comprehend

and deal

with the adverse effects of plant operations in this mode.

Violation I.B in the enclosed

Notice involves the failure to ensure that the

required prerequisites

and approvals

were met prior to commencing

core alter'ation

activities.

In this regard, activities

commenced

by maintenance

personnel

to

remove the upper core support structure without (1) 'notifying the control

room

and establishing direct communications,

(2) having the containment ventilation

isolation system operable,

and (3) being directly supervised

by a licensed

Senior Reactor Operator.

Had the control

room not responded

properly to a

radiation alarm in containment,

the removal of the upper core support structure

would have

been

completed.

It is unlikely that fuel movement

and

damage

would

have occurred which released

airb'orne activity.

Nevertheless,

we are concerned

that these failures are indicative of a lack of appreciation for controls of

licensed activity and communications

by the Maintenance staff to assure

other

organizations

are

aware of maintenance activities.

While the action by Operations

personnel

was commendable,

those of the Maintenance staff, were unacceptable.

To emphasize

again the

need for FPKL to improve the control of operations

and

the management

decisionmaking'process,

including communications

between major

plant staffs -at the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, I have

been authorized,

after

consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement,

and the Deputy Executive

Director,for Regional

Operations,

to issue the enclosed

Notice of Violation and

Proposed

Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of One Hundred Thousand

Dollars ($100,000) for the violation described in the enclosed

Notice.

In

accordance

with the "General

Statement, of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforce-

ment Actions", 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix

C (1987) (Enforcement Policy), the

violations described

in the enclosed

Notice have each

been categorized

in the

aggregate-

as'

Severity Level III problem.

The base

value of a civil penalty

for a Severity Level III problem is $50,000.

The escalation

and mitigation

factors .in the Enforcement Policy were considered.

The base civil penalty

amount

has

been increased

by 100 percent

because

of the lack of prompt correct-

ive action to the leakage situation which was

compounded

by the failure of.FP8L

management

to utilize available information of prior occurrences

relating to

the effects of boron leakage at other facilities.

There was also

a lack of an

effective management

and safety committee review of the safety evaluation.

Furthermore,

escalation

was warranted in consideration

of the poor prior

performance in the area of reactor operations

and maintenance

at Turkey Point

as evidenced

by the Category

3 ratings in the last two Systematic

Assessment

of

Licensee

Performance

(SALP) Reports,

and the number

and scope of violations in

th'ese

areas

over the past

two years.

The remaining violations in the enclosed

Notice of Violation have

been deter-

mined to be of a lesser

safety significance

and are categorized

as Severity

Level IV violations.

These

involved (a) the use of inadequate

procedures

for

the installation of reactor vessel

head

Conoseal

shims which existed from 1972

through 1985,

and the improper fabrication of Conoseal

shims during the 1984

k

)I

Florida Power and Light Company

-3-

JUL 21 1987

'

Unit 4 refueling outage,

and (b) the inadequate

procedure for calculation of

reactor

coolant system

leakage

due to use of a correction factor which was

not conservative with respect to temperature

rise.

During the Enforcement

Conference,

discussions

also included activities

relating to- the failure to control wiring of diesel

generator

sequencers.

On

March 27, 1987, with Units'3 and 4 in Mode 6, licensee

personnel

were

performing periodic testing to verify the operability and correct calibration,

of several

of the "B" Emergency Diesel Generator

(EDG) protection relays.

During this testing,

a wiring error was discovered

and promptly corrected with

corrective action documented

in 'a NonConformance

Report.

With this particular

problem identified, licensee

personnel

pursued other areas

where similar wiring

errors could have occurred.

To your credit,'ou also inspected

other work

performed

under this work oeder which revealed

two other wiring errors which

would have affected the operation of the

3B containment

spray

pump

and the

automatic start of Unit 4B and

4C intake cooling water pumps.

We have reviewed

this matter, and determined that it represents

a Severity Level IV violation.

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, since the violation was

licensee-identified,

was promptly corrected,

and could not reasonably

be expec-

ted to have

been prevented

by the licensee's

corrective action for a previous

violation,

a Notice of Violation is not being issued for this item.

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'ctions

you plan to prevent recurrence.

In preparing your response,

you should

give particular attention to explain those actions to be taken to'improve the

communication

between your maintenance,

engineering,

and operations staffs.

Atter 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 regu-

latory requirements.

In accordance

with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice,"

Part 2,

Title 10,

Code of Federal

Regulations,

a copy of this letter and its enclosure

will be placed in the

NRC Public Document

Room.

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, Public

Law No.96-511.

Sincerely,

DMHAL'lGhED BY

f'UM~"

GRNP'nclosure:

Notice of Violation and Proposed

Imposition of Civil Penalty

cc w/encl:

(See

page 4)

J.

Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

0'

Florida Power and Light Company

- 4

cc w/encl:

LF.

M. Wethy, Vice President

Turkey Point Nuclear Plant

~ J.

Baker, Plant Manager

Turkey Point Nuclear Plant

+

W. Bladow, Plant

gA Superintendent

Q. Aria's, Jr.,

Regulatory

and Compliance

Supervisor

JUL 2

1. 1987

11l26

NRC-tel-f%BB

NO. 883

Florfda Power and Lfght Company

01$TRIBVTIOM:

+~ Togr1or,

DE00

w. Hartfn

DEDRO

dY. Soh$ nkl,

OGC

Q. Lfeberlan,

OE

P. W)ano,

OE

Enfyceient goMfkit~

m,

RZE, RHI, RIV, RV

. Hurley,

NRR

Hayel

OI

. Connefly

OIA

, Jordan,

kK00

N. Ingram,

PA

p: Nussbauler,

GPSP

DCS

- 5.-

JUL2 ~ 1987

RI

RI I

g

RII

AFGibson

GRJen

ns

7/g'vs7

7/gg /s7

RII

ms

7//s7

gll

OE

OGC

.

RA: RlI

PHf 1 ano

SSoh)nkvd

JNGrace

7/tg/87

7/l5/87

7/i~/87

E

eberean

JN

r

7I~ $87

7/ gs