ML19322B782

Responds to 770420 Response to 770329 Notice of Violation & Notice of Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties.Forwards App a & Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalties Re Unplanned Release of Radioactive Secondary Sys Water from Facility

ML19322B782
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	06/13/1977
From:	Volgenau E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:	Horn C DUKE POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML19322B778	List: IR 05000269/1977001 ML19322B777 ML19322B782 ML19322B786 ML19322B790 ML19322B798 ML19322B808 ML19322B811 ML19322B814 ML19322B833
References
NUDOCS 7912050772
Download: ML19322B782 (5)

Text

_, _

• b ?

e. X '.Q

~ 3:

al l - ~g '

. l..

O

.y ~..

'e

, ~y,f ; w..;.., (

a.

+-

7.

_o 1

,. } w :g:l & {.ll " [.

,:& ' 13 W '

',, _ _,. ^,' i Qk ',

'. ~

'{l)

..i:: i 4:

- a :.:

W.,-

., n.

r., s. m%..

+.

~

s

,v, e.

u..

3

-r

. ~

i.

y ln s

4

~

3 Duke Power"Campany l\\,n.--

f f ea== Nos. DPb38, ~- 47,. '

Atta: Mr. Carl Bera. Jr.

1.

Dechat Noe. 50-269, -270,.-287 President'

e P. 9. Bar 2178. '

'5 Charletta, North Car =1t==

28242 e

f. ' 7. < w f..

Gentimment.. ::.'.

- Cc

/

' n.

t

,J*,

,n.,.,y-r j, y u

.~

s

.This la is reopease'to your latter of April 20, 1977, with attachmants, which responded to the Motica,of Violation and Notice of Proposed Impositism of civil Penaltims'.sent to you with our letter of March 29, 1977. The Marek 29 letter esacerned apparent. items of noncearlimnee

' found during a Muelear Regulatory t%=rf== tom inspecties coadneted on G

December 20 13, 1976,~~Jammar y,18-21, 1977, and January 25-28, 1977, of activities matherised by NRC I,1cemme Nos. DFb38. DPb47, and DPR-55 at -

the Ocome,a Nealear Staties, yr.tserily relating to en unplammed release l

of radioactive secondary system water from the. plant. This also refers

(

to the meeting held between you' and members of your staff and represen-t tatives of ERC at Ba* ' 'm; Maryland, ce May 26,.1977.

w-

..~.

.t I

After carafm1 consideration'of your response and in consideration of the matters diesessed at the meeting.end in Appendix A of this letter, we have sencluded that the itans.ef noncongliance did. occur with respect to Item Nos. 24,'2b7 4k Si and 7 as set out in the Notice of Violation eent to yet with our letter. dated March 29, 1977, and that no adequate reasons have been stated as'to why penalties for these itema should not be imposed as propeeed in.the Notice of Propeeed Impositism of Civil Peralties..

q-With regard to that pedian of your response (idantified as Attachment C, l

page C-2, ites 1(a) enclosed with your April 29, 1977 letter) concerning the history'of noneempliance enclosed with our March 29 letter, we concede i

that year response of Moreh 21,11974. to owr Jamesry 1974 Notice of Violaties ses essepted by R c.in that sa evaluation had previassly bees mode.% Thered'oro,1seteensider;it: appropriate.to delete.the Janssary 1974' s

-c, 7

item fram' the history of somegsgliamee. involving surveys 'end the proposed : '

civil penalty fee Item No.'I. of our March 29 letter.is mitigated from Q

Dour theumand De11 ass.es Three Thousand Five Mundred.Dellmes,

. 4,'

, l \\l..?h h.,.k1& & g f.. ~?f:, *...

'[

}.)

}.'

. lc(

~

[,

s g

hM.)I - $.

J ?,

E((

- < a.. w w m ;.y v.

v v.

3 A

e I.

j ' '; /lW l

Q>

-p -Q< +:; h. :_. *3 s,

. erswa y i

\\~ (4 #@.

a Jbd. y 4..,.,,(

n.(..

y a

3 u

m

(

g 2d, l'r[ 5 -

l" 2

[

! N' wc.~~~ m m.urm Mn.--.w-...w.,-

-u-.u

,. w u.

s WF@gd j

791205o / 7 2

~

i ydipX ba r

.c an W.,, z.a a :. w w: 9.m

. 'p

.m. wn w

~m...

c.

3 :.,- v n

s. s,

.g. y y,,,,p q y u,c:a., &w.M. ~,9

. 7 c,

.,. v m: n....

. ~ a.,

.c:

p

. y

.n

. a v..,,

., y.

(

x q y.m;;

Y

^

}

i,*

.f

.x % :

' w..l-if"K

• 4:; %v ' w@M~ Tog %;* A%

M

.. w,. r,c. e ;

2==. 1.

~.

','s

,(

y w

,.7

.a,>M

ame; 3

s;? y, Q g r.

g.

r a ; m. 3 s.m.

%ewy

~

1, s w.r.

With respect to Item Nos. 3 sad 6(b) of our Ifarah 29 Noties of Violaties; [ f v;p),j we believe, it epyrepriate, upon eensideraties of your writtom response, 3 med diosassieme at the May 26 meeting held im Bethesda during whiek p;* (td t.hsaa items were specifically.eddressed by yes.:that the penaltian for Therefore,.the propeeed penalty for. %y4 $ f M Itse No. 3 is remitted is its,emtirety and the penalty for Item No.;$ Y,%@

these itemw should be modified.

.Tyip" is mitigated from Four Themseed. Dollars ($4,000). to Two Themsend g..,J %,

Dollars ($2,000) because of taufseien of. Item No. 6(b). Ameerdingly, WM we hereby serve the enelesed Order en Duke Fouer Coupesy,1egseing T; p' Q eivil penalties la the sueulative sneunt of.51steen Thoussed Dollars ;

.,,gy

($16,000).

,..-,.<v.

2, -

- 4 x.,M,

,M W.

,:. 4

' ' ' ; t, C.. s.W% _,.3 s

e c

- g

.r,..

,,,; s ;y,

l' i*

r4 < -

r statements provided in your letter of April 29. 1977, have been reviewed

, y 6..

for complianae with the requireemets of 10 CFR. Fart 2, section 2.201.. q'. cy M Colleatively these aestaments provide.the.information required for seek, g j g itou of namesuplianas set ~out,1a,the Notisa of Violation except for ch y;w.nQ Item No.1.

Item No. I'stted,meneempliance.with.10 CF1.20.201 for # y g> y/p Q@

imedequate serveys of oil Dead' affluents., 9pesifidally, your response ~~

5 for Iran No.1 did not deseribe corrective ' steps ~ taken er p1mmad, such, J l p" "

f

• es sampling and monitoring programe, to provide adequate surveys of y

'. *p.

effluents released to the envireament.vta the turbine. building and

-d paed. Accordingly, please provide a supplemental roepense to Item No.

(

ineluding: '(1) corrective steps which have been.taken and the results

,g" echieveds (2) morrective steps ehich will.be taken to avoid resurrences 'h_ Q (s,'.

and (3).the date when full compliance'will be mehieved. This information' s

should be provided to.this office within tea daye of the data ef. receipt

'7 of thin _1stter.

t.

o'

,J y -

g p

3-

.t

.y. f '

i

'V

, _8incerely.

, ' ' ?; '

,x l,,

r 4,g @ algtgnedW

" }

{

8 3 ras O t%senan c,. s v

m a

f ; -(;}

=

~

+..

47' <,

Ernst Volgenau

?,,-

, n ge Q.

.Direeter J;"7

,9 a-D ' 1s

• 1

<,.0ffice of Inspection

-%4

,.. y, y. w-and Enforcement x

M

,~,

2 x:.

M '.W ' M, J. d,M;,n..c..

m.

, y..

.a.

~. y..

y.r. &

u

,e

.a.

m%P ' '

Emelosureet-M <[ j 5 :- h

- W _"

d Cif./d C ' t W [1, Appendix A, j; M/M.M@M.

2.. Order Imposing civil $, @ $,2.R @ s@$

k. 2. c x

V 1

J

>^

Ausmatery Aemaltime@e w :..sc M

~

- 3 y - %.y m., c m r...

e.

s

.o - - '

i :.$ Q ?. N. M,.1. ?&,.Q ;.' A. li:9

.;y..

< 7,y

' ; Q,W ;-

,l3 1

. '. '. 'h,.

.c

,...w 0

o..

4...

'.,. ".;g + 4l. f,o n

g.R '

+;\\

'.c

. $g%'%j'1,*

,3

'f

&;.Q,R<.i,%,%x-.,< w w

.n,y,Qs.f-. f

.~'.

. p,

~

.c L;.

~3 yj:l:l W

.a if....,,~

'( f.i*p $ w HQ i0 '

W..<

~*,

1, n. w guy F.

'8

' ; f, '*

X_

b

-g,a

}s f ['

i

.~

T.?

i u.

C, s.* 1 ?. N.-

Q[g[. ' *4~ % M

,e ROK g

/FTA)q _

DIE L

A / '"

sm 4 }

I ome. n lMLW N,

e 7 %.4.. >

JRMhaeri IkHhiibotham Eb[

=

b' JPNurray h.

~

' 6ll$177 :.4 ~ $)0/77.%

• 6&b ~

6 W

_ /( /77b l '

6/4 $ 77! M '6HC/77 [ '.

y on I

k p

"aW%

.S 8*m} 2 1

[

'hh e

e

-% ",M

~

p j yff

\\

f c

h -

m.,;

is/, y

, 3 7

,f

,'4 APPEMDIX A f

[

9-o

~

~ L, p,yn 7

Deke Power Company

'^

~* ~

Linease Nos. DFR-38, -47, ~55 f

Docket Nos.30-269, -270, -287'-

~f'~.-

J Aftarcarefulcanaiderationedtheinformationprovidedinyourresponaa of April 20, 1977, to the Nottee of Violation and the Notice of Proposed Imposities of Civil Penalties, dated March 29, 1977, we have reached the

~

falleving eemelusionst

,.y-1.

With respect to Item No. 1, your response stated that swipe surveys and airberna redisaativity serveys wera made in the turbine building,

'(,

'and an evaluation conaluded that the activity in water escaping from the building was not significant.

As deflaed in 10 CFR 20.201(a),' a survey means, fa part, an evalue-N tien of the radiation hasards iseident to the release of radioactive materials.

When appropriate, smeh evaluation includes a physisal,.

survey.

j,- n

...;1u

.c a

y v.

f

~,

-g,_

7 3

Your physiaal measuraamata'ef surface and air radieestivity levels S ".

did not constitute en adequata survey of radiometivity in the water being discharged to the'enrestriated area in that surveys made were not representative of the activity in the water. specifically, with regard to air'sempling, depressurisation, accompanied by desassing, of primary system water in the steam generator could reasonably be expected to limit generation'of airborne radioactivity in the j

turbine bui m ag when the water subsequently leaked to the turbine

(.

building eump.

. With respeet to surface measurements, yo;r response indicates that swipe samplas were taken from vet areas 'around the sump. As you are avere. water will cause a reduction in the radio-

^

activity detected on wet. swipe samples by absorption of medarstely penetrating beta radiation.

Even if the smears taken had been dry, I

they would not be repressatative of.the radiciodine in the water, sinca the iodine is highly soluble and would tend to remain in the water.

If some radiciodiae had. remained on dry surfaces it would q

evblima and amears vomid.still not be representative. Also, to our

-8 knowledse, me data. A====gtrattag consistent, reliable correlations.

between swipe sample,'str sample radioactivity concentraticus, and x

water sample concentrations have been estabilahad. Therefore, the 1

sonalusions reached by your staff using the data rafarred to in your response demonstrates that.your measurements did not consti-f, tuta an adegeste,? Maasetaments of radi_servey of some==4 mated water d turbine buildiat, f.

1 oactivity in the liquid being

'dimeharged is'ameeeeary to.aspare that the liwito specified in a

10 CFR 20.106 are meg angesded.( Further, the facts gathered during N J' t

and

• q-j ta tha'taspettian demonstrate that your represeo '

s tatives had,motiresegaised and'r.ecorded:the radiosecivity release 3

eeeerring besseen abeus $300 hears on January 17, 1977. and 0850 's j

bours on January 18.)1976 'g

, t ; y.g

]

'. l'W x ', :,6 g, e ;.

r.;

y-

,,.em 1

?

,l

\\

^yWQ 4 ff :

3 9

ye,~

u

,s.

,,u "a

~

s

^

a v s 4.

.y, cata b

[', _ ~

^f

'M,,.,,,,,,.

~2 3

i

• =

d J

y,;g ;c.

= ~ - cc,,

r,,,. ~;.-

e s.

x,y c

c;. A,

fp..

y<~ @.,.g,,. y ynh.qq; v.y,,,s 97 g

w r. rw y o.C

,.c.,

y 1,,

. g

• g g 1... M.,.r:o.:m.T,- m r e :.,,p.

.p,

,. y ;*,,

, yy o

. S,,

.W

..<e v

u-s t. ;. r. v

./ y[g.p[

y.a s : e.-

• (

> u

, _ m. g...,

~

9' 3-f.$N['.,h [A(&.r ! m A'

,.yp h I,* '.7

,y 9

,J Cl

' i V

• .c

, m e

+%

.ce,

. 3s s

'ig v.'. '*f -

s

' w..s,

? yr'

' tlq.

?~

Y',

2. ' ~ With respeet to Item No. 2, parts 2.s and 2.b, your response

,~'s%,Ndh94

"'")

i }, '

acknowledsee the feet of _the citation that the instantaneous

i,

. ceoncentrations of' radioactivity.ia liquid waste diasharged to w.; '

' unrestricted areas emeeeded the values in 10 CFR, 20, Appendix Bf,- a W%d Table II. Celman.2/ eentrary,ts Tenhaisal specificaties 3.9.3. ' 1; J..Q;MQ,j

. m p.-um s.

s

>.~

.,.. y.

Your reopense to item No. 4 does not demy,the fast of the eitation f.W

.j.,..;

yy y

s, 3.

. that were then 1.23 euries of redisaativity in liquida for a power,1 cy t.

g plant unit une released durfag the calendar quarter without pro-sessing all liquide using the liquid redwaste system equipment

y L i

,v.

prior to discharge.

,4

%, u. c.C. s; h.,

T

.' X:x ",;&

-w-

+

' poets gathered 'during the inspection indicate that westa volumes : i kfG D

, Vg ig

, h@g

,: leaving the turbina building sould have been reduced by about a faator of twov that holdup pond sapaatty was not used to full

~ '

'(

edventages that'an fastalled line for transferring turbium build ~

b

' M@

. ' Qf

' ' hs ' sump wetar' to,the. radiesetive weste system was not used, and

.,,.., that additional.rediometivity was unneeessarily allowed to entar 7

l.

% the turbine building meg following the initial hydrogen coolar z

,s,%. F s - 9. Leakage. A - J :f.t.:g;, 2 9..

z :..;

.- 9 7,.a,,

a 7 ;y

,e.n

5. > Tour reopense to Item Not.5 does met ' deny 'the' fact of the citation.,e ' " f,;

~

A; setual release'of radiomativity, with appropriate cheek-of that detailed writtaa emergency procedures involving p:tential or

(

,.;and instructiemas were not provided for controlling radicactivity wM M

,5c

~,v greleased ta th,e turbine building swep.

.a, 13

e

.m s

During the'.periodl August 1975 through January 1977. about seven

g.

, l steam generator ~1eaks ceasing contasminatica of the ' secondary system. f" 1

were experienced by the Oconee Nuelear Station.. %is experience

?

f

?previded ample forewarning of:the moed for an emergency procedure 4l

~~

s.,Y. l f to.eepe with turbine building sump radioactivity discharges. As discussed in referende to year response to Item No. 2, actions were C.R W

0 T 1 met based on an approved wiriytten. procedure.

s x _

,8.

.With respect to Itan'Me~,,6. your response to part (a) of the 4

altation acknowledges that. an infraction of the te4=f a=1 speet-

.'C.,

. fiestion oscurred.: f hj p 7 ql.

7 A

3 w qw ~, ' ~

':1 %.

t[4 Mitigatien et'resonsideratise ef,.'the civil penalty is.' requested om ? %.2 m..

s

. A the basis that revision.af the approved procedure to permit using M y>

W esee-4=*ted weser to leek test the steen generator was properly N S

e : Y.1, ~ Treviewed, but mes proper 1/g'deenmented..

x'

,e

w p1 y /.

.. : e.m. w; s,. v u# z & w ) [] p..

y, t...

,..y A

v 2 9.. *~ [ ~, }p,:

g v. e y

..A [ -

'.(' '.[ [ ~

_ J [ j..}

g q

,(

5-

=

Ls

. O -

. ~ b y& _ j

v. ' V wp v; - ysg&

.p.

• M

,, y 7 ^vb..

..,. ' n

.s p e;.

...a..

..y p gq.n gn

' y,. J A 4 j w,r a ' '. t. +. *

• ~

n.

n.

t r

=.

.a u

% f, '.,. ; ;}&< - ',

e'.

' r- ~x' ; &. c :. 3. 2 G...@y" ;m,Q. I 5'

c.,r -

~

u, / pw. 4,;. g... : y

. 4, w$miq{3.,

g n.

i~

,3 4..,J4.-

1

't yQQQ 7.f.Q W ' '

+

O (

~1',

r

-E'.

p u. A. T l' t

• 4y

$,f,

Y' ? g

,,,1

g

.~ 1 a w.. Y,

_ g v.

c

.n v

,e

,,,, o

' ' 7.. L; e.;

4' p* S ',a J

~

.y

. a U A* " 3 A

^

U" S. ' sun =Am s w a-

" gp g$.M Q,

] -

• • ,. - 1.

h*

4'

.i*

2

? 7 3

+. ~,,

4

.a -

y-c; ;

1 s

ans>

g

.sso

-; y.

uch, uia. eo,.v.a.n.s. m.ewy enmune omes se.r,.-.aa.ea4,.7;.s m, Y

.. P..

b M V-i '.,

.N^Pf

.w.m< ~s,w.n e%.m

,NRC.P_GRM. 338.t' M) N.BCM 0244 a

a.

m,

.m

!D E I l D~bfD }W llh t h y

i J

e

, a 7 ;.bs,.

n,q.

.M'.,Q. G

. 'c,.

e.

. s c, q... w..

2..y.. w:

\\

w' ;

~

~

. o.

n,v w. '.,,

, li

,...w 1,%; ;.?.m,3. T '*:m#

d.

n

= v

,- m m

f

~.

~-.e..'

,. :. u p%.

s

.-~,

.y<,4 j

o..,,

-.' lj j', ', e'i'..

n..

e s

< ~+-

k

.,3.i,.

c,. M. : '

m l

AppendiaA.M.f L i, N

.(

' u 7;..

~

's r.

+ -,

. r_ -

1

.s r

i:7.>.. v 4,

~

. +

Teehniaal 5pecifiaation 6.4.1 requires that the station be operated

' c and maintaimad in secordamee with approved writtom preceduras. The

' method prescribed by seatian 4.2.4.1 of year 2' M =trative Policy

}

Manoel requires that a major change.te an approved preeedure be

[

3 prepared, eyelmsted, revtewed and approved for use prior to

- c l

a.

~1aplementattem4 The copy of the procedure used to perform the test en Janeary.17( 1977, did,not sentain astries indienting that the

. procedure was changed to.use contaminated water, that is, that step 3.0 and 3.1 were em(tted er modified, nor did it indicate I

approval of any Asch changes. Verbal authorisatico to change or deviate from approved procedures does not amat Technical Specif1-

~ ;

- antions' 6.1.2.la and 6.4.1' and is unaaeoptable unless such action la accessary'to =4=4=4ma. personnel iM ury and damage to the faa4 Hey or te protsat publis health and safe. y.

t l

7,...

.\\

n<

s

6. - With regard to Itan sei.7, your response = ^=awledges that reporting

.?,requiremente of Tsehnical Specification 8.6.2.1 were not met.

w x. :.,,

y!,

'(1) mens of the criteria

w..g..

.r

..., Raatstem is requested on the baala that:

'^

, listed in Attaa hant A'te the Director of Regulatory Operations letter to all 11eansees,, dated December 31, 1974, sesve as a basia for this stant -(2) thim.uas the first tima oconee had been sited

(

for being late in notifications and. (3) the reporting una totally

• y usrelated to the inadvertent release..

t m

4c m.

m

.,v. ; 7. t

.~

(

Sc The third sentence of the fourth paragraph of the letter to which '

you referred in your response states.that a reporths requirement is viewed from the enforessent steadpoint to be of the same level

. of importanee es the matter for which the report iu required.

O...

- n'

,. 7 Further. Attaehment A to that letter states that civil penalties may be the appropriate enforcement action in those cases where the natura and nunter of.iteur of neneougliance with regulatory requirements identified during an tarpectiam demonstrate that management is not.condoeting its liaansed activities with a adequate coasarn for tha. health, safety or interest of its amployees ot the paM ia or the commen defense and security.

This ariterien dese~ met require that.all mencompliamees be q Krelated er%petitive te(ere civil penalties, are imposed.. x.mi se v.

y n.

w

.~

v.,.

1 s +,u,W W2 p,.r.1:..Ap : 3;.

m

.m

.zz u

_ _,:4

=

r c.

i.'"

c,.

.' g w Q..r) p.pli b - y Q ;.!,," f.y

1 ' '

- +2 M

+~

' P,;.

yn.

+ y.y d'.u-w. W 'y.pu y...,

:t

, - a.p, s m. ; c,y

,..X; ~ h 8... y, ~

7<

s

.a c~s,s.

. p.

y m.+ y..-

.,pv L

'g;f

?

'l f_am.x, f.e wf y Q' y '

,+

.: L

? l,3 s.n i d '; MM,g s m.

• g e, s.

'i /

1

• ' J.

. y n..%p% C; j i'lW,A W

.a(

1. L c,9 t'

~'

<!i

,.3%

.r w-n 't..,. c

.,:.3 3 r m,,.,.

?

a.

[ ', y-

,y o,

kj'[

t.

R

+

y.;

s-

< +.

~

.y c. < :

c.

t f<~

p-4 s.

s,~<

-. p:p

.t y

• q s p'>

c s

.9 v

3 a

.c s

~-

~

sunnausp.

n.

J+'

onTu 6 m,

• • t

' ' ".,q

~

i, <

.~

NRC P. SAM. 3,14. (N. 6) NRCM. 034e.. Nw a O A - M va e..o.v.sammawr ramun. ornes, een-se ea.

a.. w(,.

.a>..,.

mp.s a

~. -.

.u.,-..

,v. s,.

.u-

~

M man

[

....