ML20129G283

Ack Receipt of Re Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-269/84-16,50-270/84-15 & 50-287/84-26.No New Info Presented to Change Findings Re Violations 1 & 2. Supplemental Response Required within 30 Days

ML20129G283
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	03/20/1985
From:	Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Tucker H DUKE POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML20129G285	List: ML20129G283 ML20129G294
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-1.A.1.3, TASK-TM NUDOCS 8507180004
Download: ML20129G283 (6)

See also: IR 05000269/1984016

Text

'

• '

, ,

March 20, 1985

fe//w

Duke Power Company

ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President

Nuclear Production Department

422 South Church Street

Charlotte, NC 28242

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: REPORT N05. 50-269/84-16, 50-270/84-15, AND 50-287/84-26

We have evaluated your response of December 21, 1984, to our Notice of Violation

issued on November 23, 1984, concerning activities conducted at your Oconee

facility under NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55.

After careful review, we find you have presented no new information to change our

findings regarding Violations 1 and 2. Our comments related to your response are

enclosed. We have evaluated your responsa to Violations 1 and 2 and found that

it does not meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201; therefore, a supplemental

response is required. This supplemental response should be submitted within 30

days of the date of this letter.

Violation 3 is withdrawn; however, we request that your response to this letter

include a description of actions you plan in response to our comments relative to

this item in the enclosure.

We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

\ f

g %

J. Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Staff Assessment of Duke Power

Company Denial of Violation

for Oconee

cc w/ enc 1:

M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager

8507180004 850320

ADOCK 050002 9

bec w/ encl: $DR

NRC Resident Inspector

Document Control Desk

State of South Carolina g

c

RII RII RII RII

CJulian:aw AFGibson PBemis HDance

02/ /85 02/ /85 02/ /85 02/ /85

RII RII RII g

[ ~

VBrownlee RWalker J01shinski

02/ /85 02/ /85 02/ /85  % O[

_

,

-

.

.

. .

Duke Power Company

ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President

Nuclear Production Department

422 South Church Street

Charlotte, NC 28242

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: REPORT NOS. 50-269/84-16, 50-270/84-15, AND 50-287/84-26

We have evaluated your response of December 21, 1984, to our Notice of Violation

issued on November 23, 1984, concerning activities conducted at your Oconee

facility under NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-38 DPR-47 and DPR-55.

After careful review, we find you have presented no new information to change our

findings regarding violations 1 and 2. Violation 3; however, is withdrawn. Our

comments related to your response are enclosed. We have evaluated your response

and found that it does not meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201; therefore, a

supplemental response is requested based on our evaluation.

We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

J. Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Staff Assessment of Duke Power

Company Denial of Violation

for Oconee

cc w/ encl:

M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager

i

bcc w/ encl:

NRC Resident Inspector

Document Control Desk

State of South Carolina

,

Sn W*"" /t %"'2'~

RII RII RT RII

CJulian:aw AFGiason PBemf HDance

02/ /85 Ojl/ '\ /85 ff/

43

/85 02/ /85

RII RII RII RII.

h

VBrownlee

C)

M Wal er J0 hinski TM wW h#\,c, W

l

,A2/6/85 Oj/ /85 r3/85 of /g g 2.5 gf

L } 7

_

~

.

-

~. .

- , ,

Duke Power Company

ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President

Nuclear Production Department

422 South Church Street

Charlotte, NC 28242

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: REPORT N05. 50-269/84-16, 50-270/84-15, AND 50-287/84-26

We have evaluated your response of December 21, 1984, to our Notice of Violation

issued on November 23, 1984, concerning activities conducted at your Oconee

facility under NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55.

After careful review, we find you have presented no new information to change our

findings regarding violations 1 and 2. Violation 3; however, is withdrawn. Our

comments related to your response are enclosed. We have evaluated your response

and found that they do meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201; however, a supple-

mental response is requested based on our evaluation.

We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

4

J. Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Staff Assessment of Duke Power

Company Denial of Violation

for Oconee

cc w/ encl:

M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager

bec w/ encl:

NRC Resident Inspector

Document Control Desk

State of South Carolina

1

ggg fff yted.S Coseusci;.es

ON

! RII

f

RII RII RII

y[- [ I

""2/27

l 4CJulian:aw PBemis HDance

l AFGib on

!

02/ /85 W g/85 02/ /85 02/ti/85

kf'P

l RII RII RII

>

VBrownlee RWalker J01shinski

02/ /85 02/ /85 02/ /85

!

L

,

m.

-

" .

.

.

.

Duke Power Company

ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President

Nuclear Production Department

422 South Church Street

Charlotte, NC 28242

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: REPORT NOS. 50-269/84-16, 50-270/84-15, AND 50-287/84-26

We have evaluated your response of December 21, 1984, to our Notice of Violation

issued on November 23, 1984, concerning activities conducted at your Oconee

facility under NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55.

After careful review, we find you have presented no new information to change our

findings regarding violations 1 and 2. Violation 3; however, is withdrawn. Our

comments related to your response are enclosed. We have evaluated your response

and found that they do meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201; however, a supple-

mental response is requested based on our evaluation.

We appreicate your cooperation in this matter,

,

Sincerely,

J. Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Staff Assessment of Duke Power

Company Denial of Violation

for Oconee

cc w/ enc 1:

M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager

bec w/ enc 1:

NRC Resident Inspector

Ducument Control Desk

State of South Carolina

RII RII RII RII

CJulian:aw AFGibscn PBemis HDance

02/g/85 02/ /85 02/ /85 02/ /85

RII RII RII RII

]

VBrow[hlee RWalker J01shinski JPuckett

02/p/85 02/ /85 02/ /85 02/p/85

.

.

ENCLOSURE

STAFF ASSESSMENT OF DUKE POWER COMPANY DENIAL OF VIOLATION FOR OCONEE

We have evaluated your response to the violations stated in NRC Inspection Report

Nos. 50-269/84-16, 50-270/84-15, and 50-287/84-26 and have concluded the

following:

Violation 1:

We acknowledge the excerpts from NRC and Duke Power Company correspondence refer-

enced in your denial. We had considered them and other correspondence prior to

the issuance of the violation. We originally found that the aforementioned

correspondence supports the violation as written for the following reasons:

One aspect of the intent of NUREG-0578 (Section 2.2.la), Shift Supervisors'

Responsibilities, was to prevent distraction of the Shift Supervisor by

administrative duties. This aspect of the intent was adequately addressed

by Duke Power Company and accepted by the NRC. Another aspect of this

item's intent is " administrative functions that detract from or are subordi-

nate to the management responsibilities for assuring the safe operation of

the plant shall be delegated to other operations personnel not on duty in

the control room."

We have observed that subordinate administrative functions have been delegated to

on-duty personnel in the control room at your Oconee Station. This situation is

clearly contrary to the intent of the aforementioned item.

We observe that apparently Duke Power Company has recognized the aforementioned

intent in regards to the operation of your McGuire and Catawba Nuclear Stations

since operating crews have been provided with shift clerks at both stations. We

also note that your control room staffing at your McGuire Station exceeds that

required by their Technical Specifications as is the situation at your Oconee

Station. This situation is commendable but does not justify assigning adminis-

trative duties to the SRO in charge of control room activities.

After thorough review of the information provided, we conclude your denial of

this violation does not support your conclusion and, therefore, the violation

remains as written.

Violation 2:

After our evaluation of your denial of the violation concerning Technical Speci-

fication Figure 6.1-1, we have concluded that you have not presented any informa-

tion which would merit withdrawal or modification of the violation as written.

We are further concerned that Duke Power unilaterally and without informing the

NRC, as was done by Boston Edison Company, modified the STA program such that the

STA and control room SR0 functions are combined, based upon Duke Power Company's

agreement with a draft Commission policy. Of additional concern is that you

modified your STA program knowing that your Oconee STAS are non-degreed

. .- _. - _

.-. - . _ _ _- __ _

.

.

Enclosure 2

personnel. You are cautioned that the NRC, in good faith, accepted your previ-

ously described STA program contingent on a commitment by Duke Power Company to

provide degreed Shift Engineers by September 1985. It is our understanding that

the combined SR0/STA concept was approved at Boston Edison based on those indi-

viduals holding a degree. It is our understanding that the Oconee counterparts

-

do not hold degrees.

Violation 3:

Regarding your denial coacerning NUREG-0737, Item 1.A.1.3, the NRC did accept, in

error, your program to limit overtime. Based on our review of the pertinent

documentation, apparently the initial acceptance evaluation concerned itself

solely with operating personnel and did not consider key maintenance personnel

and health physicists or other plant staff'who perform safety-related functions.

Since your program was accepted by NRC, we withdraw the violation as written;

however, your action is now required to ensure that overtime restrictions for all

plant staff who perform safety-related functions are consistent with the letter

and intent of this NUREG-0737 action item.

- - - _ - _ .