ML20138H178

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Lists of Violations Resulting from Recent Insp Repts 50-289/96-201 on 970415 & 50-289/97-01 & 50-320/97-01 on 970320.Violations Being Considered for Escalated EA IAW NUREG-1600
ML20138H178
Person / Time
Site: Three Mile Island  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 04/25/1997
From: Hehl C
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Langenbach J
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
References
RTR-NUREG-1600 50-289-96-201, 50-289-97-01, 50-289-97-1, 50-320-97-01, 50-320-97-1, EA-97-070, EA-97-117, EA-97-70, NUDOCS 9705070093
Download: ML20138H178 (4)
v • d • e


See also: IR 05000289/1996201

Text

,

.

S .. .

.

I

.- i

j April 25,1997 {

4

( .

3-

.

EA Nos.97-070 and 97-117 ,

,

j- Mr. James Langenbach

Vice President and Director, TMI

GPU Nuclear Corporation

l

4 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station- 3

i P. O. Box 480 '

! Middletown, PA 17057-0191

SUBJECT: APPARENT VIOLATIONS RESULTING FROM RECENT INSPECTIONS AT

THREE MILE ISLAND - UM T 1

~

References: 1) NRC letter, dated April 15,1997; SUBJECT: Three Mile Island-Unit 1,

Design inspection (NRC Inspection Report No. 50-289/96-201)

2) NRC letter, dated March 20,1997; SUBJECT: NRC Integrated

Inspection Report Nos. 50-289/97-01 and 50-320/97-01

Dear Mr. Langenbach:

i

1

Based on review of findings (unresolved items) contained in reference 1, we have identified- I

seven apparent violations associated with Technical Specifications 3.3.1 and 3.6.6,

10 CFR 50.59,10 CFR 50.71(e), and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B (Criteria Ill, V_ and XVI),

as described in enclosure 1. Enclosure 1 identifies the area (s) of concern and the

reference 1 report section (and item number) that are related to specific regulatory

requirements.

!

Reference 2 contained four apparent violations associated with Technical Specifications j

6.5.1.2,10 CFR 50.59 and 10 CFR Part 50,' Appendix B, (Criteria V and XV!), as described

in enclosure 2. Enclosure 2 identifies the area (s) of concern and the reference 2 report

sections that are related to specific regulatory requirements.

The apparent violations are being considered for escalated enforcement action in  !

accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement

Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600. No Notice of Violation is presently being

issued for these inspection findings. In addition, please be advised that the number and

characterization of apparent violations described in enclosures 1 and 2 may change as a -i

result of further NRC review.

1

I

f GDI i

"

9705070093 970425 1

-

p ] ,

.

- . . . . -

A ee + e 1m-u-t +eg-m-- w- g,97g,- --

sr v.- -- v . -

-+er- w- P- W'

. -- - .- - --

, - - _ _ - - .- . - - -

.

,

.

Mr. James Langenbach ,

2

!

A predecisional enforcement conference lo discuss these apparent violations has been

.

scheduled for May 22,1997. The decician to hold a predecisional enforcement conference

l

does not mean that the NRC has determined th::hese violations have occurred or that

enforcement action wi1 be taken. This conference is being 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 violations sooner,

corrective actions, significance of the issues and the need for lasting and effective

corrective action.

At the conference, we expect your presenta? ion to address, but not be limited to, the

following issues associated with the apparent violations:

i

i (1) design control weaknesses in the peformance of calculations and in the

i control of calculations used in the analysis for switchover of the decay heat

removal system (DHRS) pump suction from the borated water storage tank

'

(BWST) to the reactor building sump under post-accideat conditions;

(2) calculations that were being performed in documents, such as memoranda,

technical data reports, and plant engineering evaluation requests, that do not

comply with your engineering procedures for calculations;

(3) nonconservative assumptions and missing inputs in calculations for the

makeup pumps and makeup tank;

(4) a potential unreviewed safety question when evaluating a Final Safety

Analysis Report (FSAR) change regarding the net positive suction head for

the DHRS pumps; and

(5) untimely and ineffective actions relative to dispositioning of licensee

identified deficiencies associated with the Quality Classifiestion List.

The conference provides 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 Vll. This

conference will be open to public observation,

- - --_-_- ----__ - __ - - -

.

1

.

Mr. James Langenbach 3

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 I

its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room,

i

Sincerely,

~

!!(-h  :

Charles W. Hehl, Director

Division of Reactor Project

Docket No. 50-289

License No. DPR-50

Enclosures:

1. Apparent Violations Relative to NRC Inspection Report

50-289/96-201

2. Apparent Violations Relative to NRC Inspection Report

50-289/97-01  !

1

cc w/ encl:

E. L. Blake, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge (Legal Counsel for GPUN)

J

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania l

J. C. Fornicola, Director, Licensing and Regulatory Affairs l

M. J. Ross, Director, Operations and Maintenance

TMI-Alert (TMIA)  !

J. S. Wetmore, Manager, TMI Regulatory Affairs l

l

!

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

L_________

- .- .-.. . -- .- .. . .- . _ _. - . .

.

l

.

Mr. James .Langenbach

l

4 l

1

2

Distribution w/ encl:

Region I Docket Room (with concur.rences) l

!

NRC Resident inspector l

. Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC) j

PUBLIC

l

- D. Holody, RI

j J. Lieberman, OE ]

j

j

'

R. Gallo, NRR -

S. Malur, NRR I

! T. Kenny,DRS

'

P. Eselgroth, DRP l

D. Haverkamp, DRP i

C. O'Daniell, DRP I

-

D. Screnci, PAO (1)  ;

. W. Dean, OEDO  ;

P. Milano, NRR, PDI 3 ,

j B. Buckley, PM, NRR, PDI-3 l

l Inspection Program Branch, NRR (IPAS)

l

R. Correia, NRR i

R. Frahm, Jr., NRR  !

i

DRS File (1)

1

,

i

i

'

,

4

1

^

DOCUMENT NAME: A:ENFLTH.TML g j 6, seg% et h

G.4 h Ar#, A. Ceyp oi N'

g

,

Ts receive a copy of this document. ind. rate la the bou *C" = Copy without attaGhmenvcClosure

  • E" = Copy with attachmentlenclosure "N* = No copy

i OFFICE Rl/DRS Rl/DRS , ,\) Rl/DRP g ) EL Rl/ORAg NRR [4 (g l

NAME TAENNY d Aq[ GKEpK7f p f P@{d7EBOTg a DHOLOI3V M RGALLO _ grp

DATE 03/19/97 .yVA 03Qd9C/ .

03/20/97 _

V f 03 5{/97 jo3/Lt/{" l

0FFICE RI/ORF l  ; RI/ .bn) l / l l

NAME WHehl ,Auj / W %wd tu

DATE 04/23/7/ 04/ t.4 /97 0 04/ /97 04/ /97 04/ /97  !

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY ,

. ._ . _ _ . - . _ . ._ _ _ _. __. - _ _ . . . . _ . _ . . __ .

-

i

i

4 .

EECLOSURE 1

APPAREET VIOLATIOES RELATIVE TO BBC IRSPECTION REPORT 50-289f96201

a

Regelsteri Report Sestsee

j Regoirement Ares et Consere stem Esmher)

a

i

4

Technical Adequacy of BWST setpoint for DHRS pump switchover to RB sump E1.3.2.2.a

Specification 3.3.1 (964G113)

i

Technical Lack of documented instructions for alignment of MU V 18 50 power E1.2.3.2.b

Specification 3.6.6 supply (96-201 10)

!

! 10 CFR 50.59 Design basis valve stroke times in surveillance procedure E 1,2.2.2.d  ;

1

!96 201 05)

.

Adequacy of safety evaluation of an FSAR change E1.3.2.2.b

'

(96-201 14)

2

I

l

l 10 CFR 50.71(e) FSAR discrepancies E1.2.7

i (96 201 12)

<

! Discrepancies between FSAR and Technical Specifications regarding E1.3.2.2.d l

. DHRS leakage (96 201 16) I

i

'

FSAR discrepancies E1.3.7 j

!

(96 201 26) l

i

I

!

,

W-

___ . _ _ . _ ._. __

.

.

Enclosure 1 2

-

W atery Report Sectue

. Ruperament Area of Concere Stem besser)

10 CFR 50, App B, Adequacy of makeup tank pressurellevel curves E1.2.2.2.c

Criterion 111 (96-201 04)

Dssign Control

Adequacy of BWST setpoint for DHRS pump switchover to RB sump E1.3.2.2.a

j (96 201 13)

l Leak testing of DHRS pump suction check valves (first example) E1.3.2.2.e

(96 20117A)

. .

"

!

'

Leak testing of DHRS pump discharge check valves (second example) E1.3.2.2.s

i (96 20117B) i

I

!

)

'

Inspection of DHRS pump vault floor drain check valves (third I

'

example) E1.3.2.2.e j

, (96 20117C)

i

Static head correction for BWST level transmitter

E1.3.4.2.a

(96 201 21)

l

Control of calculations l

E1.4

,

(96 201 28)

10 CFR 50, App. 8, Lack of documented lastructions for alignment of MU V 18 DC power E1.2.3.2.b

Criterion V supply (96-201 10)

Instructions,  !

i

Procedures and

Drawings Failed to follow procedure instructions for testing of molded case E 1.3.3.2.a

circuit breakers (96 201 20)

Failed to follow drawing instructions for BWST level transmitter E 1.3.6.2.c

enclosure and heat tracing (96 201 25)

10 CFR 50, Ap. B, Timeliness of action on SSFI open items [1.3.2.2.f

Criterion XVI (96-201 18)

Corrective Actions

>

. . . .. ... - - .. . __. __ -

.

.

4

Enclosure 1 3

_

_

Regulatory Report Secties

Rogerement Area of Cassere mom Bomber)

Currently Not an Makeup tank level instrument loop tolerances E1.2.4.2.s

Apparent Violation (96 201 12)

i

i

l

T-laction of BWST low level alarm for operator action E 1.3.4.2.c

(96-201 23)

.

f

i

-

]

i

'

l

,

1

. _ _ _ __ _. _ . __ __

n

1

4'

i.

EBCLOSURE 2

APPAREET VIOLATIOBS RELATIVE TO RRC IRSPECIME REPORT 5828Sf9781

,

Regeistory

)

l Regoiremsets Area ef Concern Report fecties i

Technical Failed to include Engineering Procedure E 011, Revision 4, in the E.2.1.2

Specification 6.5.1.12 safety review process l

,

i

,

10 CFR 50.5g Failed to perform and document safety evaluations regarding quality E.2.1.1

, classification list (QCL) level reductions for components of four

) syste'ns described in the UFSAR

10 CFR 50, App. 8, Failed to follow Engineering Procedure E 011, Revision 4, for E.2.1.2

Criterion V downgrading components l

Instructions, j

Procedures and

Drawings

10 CFR 50, App. h, Previous corrective actions relative to quality clasufication list (QCL) E.2.1.3

Criterion XVI deficiencies had not been effective or timely

Corrective Action

.>

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20138H178&oldid=2978007"