ML18100A222
| ML18100A222 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 04/09/2018 |
| From: | Khadijah West NRC/RGN-III |
| To: | Kanavos M Exelon Generation Co |
| Heck J | |
| References | |
| EA-17-138 IR 2017009 | |
| Download: ML18100A222 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000454/2017009
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
2443 WARRENVILLE RD. SUITE 210
LISLE, ILLINOIS 60532-4352
April 9, 2018
Mr. Mark Kanavos
Site VP, Byron Generating Station
4450 North German Church Rd
Byron, IL 61010-9794
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF NRC LETTER UPHOLDING DISPUTED VIOLATION
DOCUMENTED IN EVALUATION OF CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS
BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000454/2017009, 05000455/2017009
Dear Mr. Kanavos:
In a letter dated February 8, 2018, to Anne T. Boland, Director of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commissions (NRC) Office of Enforcement, you requested the NRC review a December 21,
2017, decision by Kenneth G. OBrien, Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, Region III, to
uphold Non-Cited Violation (NCV)05000454/2017009-01; 05000455/2017009-01, which Exelon
had disputed. After reviewing that decision, and your February 8, 2018, letter, and after
coordination with the Director of the Office of Enforcement, I have decided to accept your
request for review. To be clear, our process does not provide for multiple appeals of the
Regions determination. Rather, under the specific facts of this case, I interpret your request
instead as Exelons initial appeal of the specific and substantive modifications to the NCV
reflected in Region IIIs December 21 decision.
Consideration of this appeal is warranted in this case because the June 29, 2017, inspection
report that documented the NCV (Byron Station Units 1 and 2Evaluations of Changes Tests,
and Experiments Baseline Inspection Report 05000454/2017009; 05000455/2017009) did not
fully articulate the basis for the violation. Region III acknowledged this limitation in its
December 21, 2017, letter, noting that the initially-documented NCV, included an explanatory
statement that was open to interpretation, and provided additional information to justify the
NCV.
The additional information and analysis relied upon by Region III to uphold the NCV was not
previously provided to Exelon in writing. In turn, Exelons February 8 appeal asserts detailed
new arguments and information that Region III could not have reasonably expected Exelon to
have raised earlier, given how the NCV was first documented.
Accordingly, I have determined the unusual facts and circumstances of this particular case
warrant consideration as an initial appeal of Region IIIs December 21 decision. Consistent with
that approach, the review will be conducted by an independent panel, which will consider all
relevant information provided on this matter to date. The panels final determination will rely in
M. Kanavos
- 2 -
part upon input from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation regarding the proper application
of the NRC-approved Surveillance Frequency Control Program at Byron Station.
This letter will be made available electronically for public inspection and copying from the
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) available at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and in the NRC Public Document Room in
accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 2.390, Public Inspections,
Exemptions, Requests for Withholding.
Sincerely,
/RA/
K. Steven West
Regional Administrator
Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455
cc: Distribution via LISTSERV
OFC
RIII/ORA
RIII/ORA
NAME
JHeck:jc
ABoland1
Moulding2
KSWest
DATE
4/2/18
04/05/18
4/2/18
04/09/18