ML20134J706
| ML20134J706 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1996 |
| From: | Gibson A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Beard P FLORIDA POWER CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134J709 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9611180002 | |
| Download: ML20134J706 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000302/1996012
Text
.
-
--
- -_.. -- - -
- -- - -- -
- . . . . - -
-
..
4:,
.
s
'
.
I
i
>
j
November 4. 1996
i,
EA 96-365
I
Florida Power Corporation
!
Crystal River Energy Complex
'
Mr. P. M. Beard Jr. (SA2A)
i
Sr. VP Nuclear Operations
ATTN:
Mgr.. Nuclear Licensing
4
'
15760 West Power Line Street
Crystal River. FL 34428-6708
SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-302/96-12
1
Dear Mr. Beard:
,
This refers to the inspection conducted on August 26 through October 11. 1996.
-at the Crystal River facility. The purpose of the ins)ection was to review
the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) loading issues. w1ich resulted from the
i
Emergency Feedwater System modification performed at your facility during the
l
recent refueling outage in April - May 1996, and also to review the root
causes of these issues. The enclosed report presents the results of this
-inspection.
1
.
Based on the results of this inspection. three apparent violations were
identified and are being considered for escalated enforcement action in
'
accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC
Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy). NUREG-1600.
The first a) parent violation involves three instances where Unreviewed Safety
Questions (JSQs) related to increased EDG loading were introduced by an April
-
1996 plant modification, a May 1996 emergency operating procedure revision,
and a June 1990 plant operating procedure revision.
In each of these
instances, the US0s were not recognized by the 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluations
that were_ performed prior to making the changes
Consequently, your failure
to obtain the required NRC review and approval prior to making the changes
constitutes an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.59.
The second apparent violation involves two examples of inadequate corrective
actions related to the April 1996 plant modification.
Your corrective action
for a similar problem in June 1994 failed to prevent.the April 1996 inadequate
10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation, and your corrective action implemented after
this issue was . identified and documented by members of your staff in a May
1996 Precursor Card was not adequate.
The third apparent violation involves an engineering procedure that improperly
allowed an unverified April 1996 EDG loading calculation to be used to support
the above. referenced April 1996 plant modification.
When you later undertook
appropriate verification and review of EDG loading in October 1996. you
identified a nonconservative error that was in the unverified April 1996 EDG
g\\
loading calculation.
The engineering procedure also impro)erly permitted the
general use of unverified electrical system calculations
lydraulic system
calculations, and station blackout calculations to support the design.
1, _ s , installation, and use of p] ant modifications.
9611100002 961104
N
g2
,
gf
DR
ADOCK O
.
-
._
.--
.
- -
. _ - - . - - _ - - _ -
_
4
4
2
No Notice of Violation is presently being issued for these inspection
!
findings. The number and characterization of the apparent violations
,
described in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further
j
NRC review.
A predecisional enforcement conference to discuss these apparent violations
i
will be scheduled at a later date. The decision to hold a predecisional
!
enforcement conference does not mean that the NRC has determined that a
violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This
conference will be held to obtain information to enable the NRC to make an
enforcement decision, such as a common understanding of the facts, root
causes, missed opportunities to identify the apparent violation sooner,
corrective actions, significance of the issues and the need for lasting and
'
effective corrective action.
In particular, we expect you to address any
additional examples you may have identified of similar inadequate US0
determinations inadequate corrective actions, or unverified calculations that
were relied upon to support plant modifications.
Also, since your independent
reviews of the modification and procedure revisions did not identify the US0s
or the inappropriate use of unverified calculations, please address how
independent reviews of modifications, operating 3rocedures, and engineering
procedures are conducted at your facility.
Furtier since your engineering
self assessment of April 19. 1996, was generally ineffective and failed to
conclude that your use of unverified calculations to support plant
modifications was contrary to NRC. regulations, please address how self
assessments are conducted at your facility.
In addition, this will be an
opportunity for you to point out any errors in our inspection report and for
you to provide any information concerning your perspectives on 1) the severity
of the violations. 2) the application of the factors that the NRC considers
when it determines the amount of a civil penalty that may be assessed in
accordance with Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy. and 3) any other-
application of the Enforcement Policy to this case, including the exercise of
discretion in accordance with Section VII.
You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our
deliberations on this matter.
No response regarding these apparent violations
is required at this time.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice." a copy of
this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Sincerely..
Original signed by
l
Albert F. Gibson
Albert F. Gibson. Director
'
Division of Reactor Safety
[
Dov et No. 50-302
i
License No. DPR-72
Enclosure:
Inspection Report
cc w/ enc 1:
See page 3
-_
-
- - .
,
--
--
. .-
-
- --
. -
i
- .
.
4
Distribution w/ enc 1:
J. Lieberman. OE
DE:
EA File (B. Summers) (2)
L. Raghavan. NRR
K. Landis, RII
G. Hallstrom, RII
PUBLIC
NRC Resident Inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
6745 N. Tallahassee Road
'
Crystal River FL 34428
,
f
$& fAbt!eOl2$ 0 eA ( Lt$b505
- .p
=
OrffCF
- 1i
off
P!I
pfI
pfI
pff
SIGNATURE
g
g
g
p
R/
NAME
RSchin
EGirard
PHarmon
CCasto
x Landis
BuryC
DATE
10 /
/ 96
10 / 3 / / 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
/] / 96
10 /
/ 96
COPY
YES
NO
M
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
6[D
NO
YES
NO
OFF!CF
PTf
SIGNATURE
gt.0
NAME
C[ vans
DATE
' y[1 8
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
COPY?
(YE'SJ
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
DOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\CR96-128.RPS
i
.
4
Distribution w/ encl:
K. Landis RII
L. Raghavan. NRR
G. Hallstrom. RII
PgB.L)kp,e(E6.~^XN
m o m r.mo , o -
NRC Resident inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission
6745 N. Tallahassee oad
Crystal River. FL
4428
!
Orrirr
pit
pit
off
off
off
p!" A
'
SIGNATURE
,,
NAME
R5t' din
EGirard
PHarmon
CCas
Klandis
c ,
\\/96
DATE
10!29/96
10 /
/%
10 / ?D/ 96
10 /_ N / %
10 /
/ 96
1
COPY?
@ NO
YES
NO
YES
N0
[ES)
NO
YES
NO
[YES)
N0
orritt
ptr
SIGNATURE
NAME
CEvans
DATE
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
10 /
/ 96
COPY?
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\CR96-12B.RPS