ML20059C361
| ML20059C361 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1993 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059C348 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-93-275, NUDOCS 9401050127 | |
| Download: ML20059C361 (5) | |
Text
oct 3 0 -
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY TV Electric Docket Nos. 50-445; 50-446 Comanche Peak Steam License Nos.-NPF-87; NPF-89 Electric Station EA 93-275 During an NRC inspection conducted October 26-November 3, 1993, violations of NRC requirements were identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 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 violations and' associated civil penalty' are set forth below:
A.
Criterion III of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 requires, in part, that measures be established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and the design basis, as defined in Section 50.2 and as specified in the license application, for those structures, systems, and components to which this appendix applies are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures and instructions.
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 9.1.4, " Fuel Handling System," states, in part, that the associated fuel handling structures in Containment are divided by a refueling gate into two areas: the refueling cavity and Containment fuel transfer area.
FSAR Table 17A-1, " List of Quality Assured Structures, Systems and Components," lists refueling gates and indicates that Notes 27 and A are applicable. Note 27 states " Meets pertinent portions of the quality assurance criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50, Appendix B as defined by specification." Note A states "An Operations QA Program will be implemented which satisfies applicable requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Rev. 2, ' Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operations).'"
1.
Contrary to the above, as of October 26, 1993, the licensee failed to assure that the design basis and applicable regulatory requirements were correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures and instructions.
Specifically, the licensee did not include the refueling gates and seals in an operational quality assurance program. (01013) 2.
Contrary to the above, as of October 26, 1993, no design drawings or specifications existed for equipment essential to the safety-related function of 'the refueling cavity lift gate. The i
subassembly used to inflate the refueling cavity lift gate seal was not adequately controlled by procedures, drawings, specifications, or instructions and was modified in an uncontrolled manner. (01023)
B.
CPSES Technical Specification 6.8.1 states, in part, " Written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering... the 9401050127 931230 PDR ADOCK 05000445 i
G PDR i
nct 3 rt Notice of Violation ;
applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978."
Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33 lists activities that should be i
covered by written procedures, including " Preparation for Refueling and Refueling Equipment Operation" and " Authorities and Responsibilities for Safe Operation and Shutdown."
I l.
CPSES Station Operating Procedure (SOP) - 506, " Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System," Revision 6, Attachment 10, "SFP System Gate Seal Guidance" provided instructions for the pressurization of the refueling cavity lift gate seal and states, in part, that when the lift gate is in use, instrument air or nitrogen should remain aligned to the supply source.
Contrary to the above:
a.
On October 23, 1993, the licensee did not assure that plant personnel implemented SOP-506, in that both contract and licensee personnel established pressure to the refueling cavity lift gate seal without knowledge of and use of S0P-506, Attachment 10.
b.
On October 24, 1993, the licensee did not assure that plant l
personnel properly implemented S0P-506, in that the pressurization source to the refueling cavity lift gate was changed from nitrogen to service air, which was not authorized by procedure.
t c.
On October 26, 1993, the licensee did not assure that plant personnel implemented S0P-506, in that a Field Support Supervisor again changed the pressurization source for the refueling cavity lift gate without knowledge of and use of SOP-506, Attachment 10. (01033) 2.
Station Administrative Procedure (STA)-601, " Authority for Equipment Operation," Revision 9, Section 6.1.3 states, in part, 1
that "The operation of all plant systems and equipment with the exception of those detailed in section 6.3 or other approved station procedures is a function perfonned only by Shift Operations personnel or those organizations authorized to operate
.i plant equipment by the Shift Supervisor."
i Contrary to the above, on October 24, 1993, contract personnel changed the pressurization source to the refueling cavity lift gate, equipment that is not covered by exceptions, without being authorized to operate this plant equipment by the Shift Supervisor.
(01043) 5
30 83 mer i
STA-601, " Authority for Equipment Operation," Revision 9, Section 6.5, " Control of Infrequently Performed Evolution or Heightened Level of Awareness Activity," defines infrequently performed evolutions or tests to include, in part, evolutions that seldom are performed even though covered by existing normal or abnormal procedures. Section 6.5.2 states, in part, that depending on the complexity of the evolution, Operations Management, Responsible Group Management or the Duty Manager may provide overview of the evolution to ensure experience of resources performing the task, an adequate brief is conducted between all organizations involved in the evolution, and clear lines of responsibility are established between all personnel involved.
Contrary to the above, on October 23, 1993, prior to the initial pressurization of the refueling cavity lift gate, and on October 24, 1993, prior to the transfer of the refueling cavity lift gate pressurization source from nitrogen to service air, both infrequently performed evolutions, the licensee did not assure the experience of resources performing the task, did not assure that a briefin was conducted between all organizations involved in the evolutian, and did not assure that clear lines of responsibility were est 311shed. (01053)
C.
Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 states, in part, that
" activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions."
1.
Contrary to the above, as of October 26, 1993, S0P-506, " Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System," Revision 6, Attachment 10 did not provide adequate instructions for the establishment of the refueling cavity lift gate seal, an activity affecting quality.
Specifically, Attachment 10 specified the use of instrument air where none was available and did not adequately describe the arrangement necessary to have a reliable pressure source to the lift gate seal. (01063) 2.
Contrary to the above, as of October 26, 1993, S0P-110A, " Reactor Coolant Drain Tank System," Revision 1, Step 5.7.6 did not provide instructions appropriate to the draindown of the refueling cavity, with the refueling cavity lift gate installed. The step allowed drain valves on both sides of the lift gate to be open simultaneously and did not alert operators to the potential for sluicing of water from one side to the other to occur. (01073)
These violations represent a Severity Level III problem (Supplement I).
Civil Penalty - 550,000.
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, TV Electric (Licensee) is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, within 30 days of the date
-3, I
Notice of Violation of this Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice).
This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each alleged violation:
(1) _ admission or denial of the alleged violation, (2) the reasons for the violation if admitted, and if denied, the reasons why, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the. corre **ive steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, (5) the date when fi 'l compliance will be achieved.
If an adequate reply is not received
'hin the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for Informat-may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the t
response time 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.
Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, the Licensee may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft, money order, or electronic transfer payable to the Treasurer of the United 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 protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part, by a written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Should the Licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the civil penalty will be issued.
Should the Licensee elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, in whole or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an " Answer to a Notice of Violation" and may:
(1) deny the violation (s) listed in this Notice, in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed.
In addition to protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty.
In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the factors addressed in Section VI.B.2 of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation 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 page and paragraph numbers)'to avoid repetition. The attention of the Licensee is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty.
Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282c.
The response noted above (Reply to Notice of Violation, letter with payment of civil penalty, and Answer to a Notice of Violation) should be addressed to:
'l
I ner.3n 'em i.
Notice of Violation 4 Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATIN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza i
Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas, 76011, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station.
i i
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 30th day of December 1993 r
i I
J
)
4 l
1
<