ML20133C788
| ML20133C788 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | Caldwell J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Jamila Perry COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133C791 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-96-391, NUDOCS 9701080095 | |
| Download: ML20133C788 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000010/1996013
Text
hUbl/b
'
re o/
.
December 31, 1996
EA 96-391
Mr. J. S. Perry
Site Vice President
Dresden Station
Commonwealth Edison Company
6500 North Dresden Road
Morris, IL 60450
SUBJECT:
NRC RESIDENT INSPECTION REPORT 50-010:237:249/96013(DRP)
Dear Mr. Perry:
This refers to the inspection conducted on September 1 through October 18,1996, at the
Dresden Nuclear facility. The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether
activities authorized by the license were conducted safely and in accordance with Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements. During this period, routine resident
inspections were performed. At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were
discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report.
Based on the results of this inspection, one apparent violation was identified and is being
considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of
Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600.
The apparent violation involved the failure to maintain Unit 3 primary containment leakage
within acceptable limits between January and May 1995. This licensee identified issue,
'
described in Section E2.1 of the enclosed report, is of concern because inadequate design
modification review and poor maintenance instructions for the installation of primary
containment isolation valves resulted in the degradation of the primary containment
system. This degradation had the potential for control room and offsite radiological doses
in excess of regulatory limits during the design bases accident.
The circumstances surrounding the apparent violation, the significance of the issue, and
corrective actions were discussed with members of your staff at the exit meeting on
October 17,1996. As a result, it may not be necessary to conduct a pre-decisional
enforcement conference in order to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision.
However, a Notice of Violation is not presently being issued for the inspection finding.
Before the NRC makes its enforcement decision, we are providing you an opportunity to
either: (1) respond to the apparent violation addressed in this inspection report within
30 days of the date of this letter or (2) request a pre-decisional enforcement conference.
Please contact Mr. Patrick Hiland at (630) 829-9603 within 7 days of the date of this letter
to notify the NRC of your intended response.
Your response to the apparent violation should be clearly marked as a " Response to An)
Apparent Violation in Inspection Report Nos. 50-237;249/96013(DRP)," and should
}
include: (1) the reason for the apparent violation, or, if contested, the basis for
i
\\
9701080095 961231
ADOCK 05000010
l
G
pm
_
.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
_ . _ _ _
_ ._ _
_
_
i
b
Mr. Perry
-2-
~e
disputing the apparent violation; (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the
results achieved; (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations; and
(4) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
I
Your response should be submitted under oath or affirmation and may reference or include
'
previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the
l
required response, if an adequate response is not received within the time specified or an
extension of time has not been granted by the NRC, the NRC will proceed with its
j
enforcement decision or schedule a pre-decisional enforcement conference.
i
l
l
in addition, please be advised that the characterization of the apparent violation described
in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further NRC review. You will
<
be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter.
,
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,
'
its enclosures, and your response (if you choose to provide one) will be placed in the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR). To the extent possible, your response should not include
.
any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the
PDR without redaction.
1
Sincerely,
4
l-3l}Abh"bt ft2
!
James L. Caldwell, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
!
Docket Nos. 50-10; 50-237; 50-249
,
!
Enclosure: Inspection Report
I
.
.
i
j
FILE NAME: R:\\t N S PR PTS \\ POW E R S\\D R ES\\D R E96013. D R P
To receive a copy of this document. indicate in the box "C" a Copy without attach /enci *E" = Copy with attach / encl
"N* =
,
No copy
,
k
0FFICE
DPP
N
Rlit
b
Rill
.W M
'
hdh
Kozak N
Burges
hCaldwel
f_
NAME
Hapkins [b
H11and
DATE
12/b9
12/(/96
12/ 5 /96
12/4./d @
/12/71/96Y
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY fw W
re-
.
I
.
Mr. Perry
-3-
.
cc w/ encl:
T. J. Maiman, Senior Vice President
Nuclear Operations Division
D. A. Sager, Vice President,
Generation Support
H. W. Keiser, Chief Nuclear
Operating Officer
T. Nauman, Station Manager Unit 1
M. Heffley, Station Manager Units 2 and 3
F. Spangenberg, Regulatory Assurance
Manager
I. Johnson, Acting Nuclear
Regulatory Services Manager
Richard Hubbard
Nathan Schloss, Economist
Office of the A1'orney General
State Liaison Officer
Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission
Document Control Desk-Licensing
Distribution:
Docket File w/enct
Project Manager, NRR w/enci
PUBLIC IE-01,v/ encl
DRP w/enci
OC/LFDCB w/enci
Rlli PRR w/enct
SRI LaSalle, Dresden,
CAA1 w/encI (E-Mail)
Quad Cities w/ encl
A. B. Beach, w/enci
RAC1 (E-Mail)
B. L. L'urgress, w/enci
W. L. Axelson, w/enci
i
!
I
j