ML20198P507

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Insp Rept 50-271/97-11 on 971031-1206 & Notice of Violation.One Violation Identified.Violation Involved Licensee Not Providing Effective Direct Oversight of Switching Orders Initiated by Vermont Electric Power Co
ML20198P507
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 12/23/1997
From: Miller H
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Reid D
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP.
Shared Package
ML20198P509 List:
References
50-271-97-11, EA-97-532, NUDOCS 9801220139
Download: ML20198P507 (4)


See also: IR 05000271/1997011

Text

December 23,1997

EA No: 97 532

Mr, Donald Reid

Senior Vice President, Operations

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation

RD 5, Box 169

Ferry Road

Brattleboro, Vermont 05301

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50 271/9711 AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Dear Mr. Reid:

On December 6,1997, the NRC completed an inspection at your Vermont Yankee reactor

facility. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspcction.

During the 5 week period covered by this inspection period, your conduct of activities at

the Vermont Yankee f acility was generally characterited by safety-conscious operations,

sound engineering and maintenance practices, and careful radiological work controls.

Based upon the inspectors' observations this period, one violation of regulatory

requirernents was cited. This violation was the consequence of Vermont Yankee (VY)

having not provided effective direct oversight of switching orders initiated by Vermont

Electric Power Company and performed by VY auxiliary operators in the owner controlled

345 KV switchyard. We understand that the automatic reactor scram on November 25,

1997 was precipitated by auxiliary operators manipulating 345 KV disconnects, while

unisolated frcem their power source. Fortuitously, no personnel injuries occurred.

However, the event could have been avoided had the switchyard activities been better

controlled.

This violation is cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation, and the circumstancer

surrounding the violation are describcd in detailin the enclosed report. Please note that

you are required to respond to this letter and should folicw the instructions specified in the

enclosed Notice wher, preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part,

to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with

regulatory requirements.

included in this report is the closeout of two Unresolved items. Unresolved Itern 96-08 02

involves the event documented in VY LER 96 015, where the VY staff used industry

operating experience to identify the abser'ce of thermal overpressure protection in certain

piping systems penetrating primary containment. VY identified and corrected this "old

design issue" by a combination of pipe modifications to preclude the conditions creating

the containment vulnerability,

t

y..

9001220139 971223

~[ U >

l

'

PDR

ADOCK 05000271

l.1;\\).![lGR,yllgl;

a

"""

.

Mr. Donald A. Reid

2

This design issue is an apparent violation of NRC requirements which could be considered

for escalated enforcement and subject to a civil penalty. However, after consultation with

the Director, Office of Enforcement, I have been authorized to not issue a Notice of

Violation and not propose a civil penalty in this case in accordance with the provisions

provided in Section Vll.0.3 of the NRC's Enforcement Policy. This decision was made after

consideration that: (1) the violation was identified by your staff's good questioning

attitudes during voluntary initiatives; (2) corrective actions were comprehensive and timely;

(3) the condition war subtle in nature and not likely to be disclosed through routine

surveillance or quality assurance activities; and (4) the violation is not reasonably linked to

current performance. The exercise of discretion acknowledges your good e' fort to identify

and correct subtle violations that would not be identified by routine efforts before the

degraded safety systems are called upon.

The second unresolved item involved the potential violation of 10 CFR 70.24, Criticality

Accident Requirements. We have determined that your facility was in violation of this

regulation, in that VY did not have, in place, either a criticality monitoring systern for

storage and handling of new (non Irradiated) fuel or an NRC approved exernption to the

regulation. Numerous ether facilities have similar circumstances. The NRC has

reconsidered this violation and concluded based on the information discussed in the report

that, although a violation did exist, it is appropriate to exercise enforcement discretion for

Violations involving Special Circumstances in accordance with Section Vil B.6 of the

Enforcement Policy. The bases for exercising this alscretion are: the lack of safety

significance of the failure to meet 10 CFR 70.24;the failure of the NRC staff to recognize

the need for an exemption during the licensing process; the prior NRC position concerning

the lack of a need for an exemption; and finally, the NRC's intention to amend 10 CFR 70.24 through rulemaking to provide for administrative controls in lieu of criticality

monitors. Therefore, VY's noncompliaace with 10 CFR 70.'24 was not cited. Pending the

amendment to 10 CFR 70.24, furthur enforcement action will not be taken for failure to

meet 10 CFR 70.24 provided you obtain an exemption to this regulation before the next

receipt of fresh fuel or before the next planned movement of fresh fuel,

in accordance with 10 CFR 2.700 of the NRC's " Rules of Practices," a copy of this letter

and the enclosed Notice will be placed in the NRC Public Docuraent Room.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By:

Hubert J. Miller

Regional Administrator

Enclosures:

1.

Notice of Violation

2.

NRC Inspection Report 50 271/97 11

Docket No. 50-271

_-.

Mr. Donald A. Reid

3

1

cc w/ encl:

R. McCullough, Operating Experience Coordinator Vermont Yankee

G. Sen, Licensing Manager, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation

J. Gilroy, Director, Vermont Public Interest Research Group, Inc.

r) Teff t, Administrator, Bureau of Radiologleal Health, State of New Hampshire

Clief, Safety Unit, Office of the Attorney GenJral, Commonw".'Ith of Mascachusetts

'

D. Lewis, Esquire

G. Bisbee, Esquire

J. Block, Esquire

T. Rapone, Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety

State of New Hampshire, SLO Des.gnee

State of Vermont, SLO Designee

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, SLO Designee

D. Rstz, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)

i

_

_

Mr. Donald A. Reid

4

Distribution w/ encl:

Region 1 Docket Room (with concu::ences)

l

PUBLIC

Nuclear Safety information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident inspector

H. Miller, RA/W. Axelson, DRA

G. Morris, DRS

C. Cowgill, DRP

R. Summers, DRP

C. O'Daniell, DRP

D. Holody, EO, RI

QigitibMM9D w/enci (VIA E MAIL..

M. Leach, OEDO

K. Jabbour, NRR

R. Eaton, NRR

R. Zimmerman, ADPR, NRR

J. Liebermon, OE (OEMAIL)

J. Goldberg, OGC

R. Correia, NRR

F. Talbot, NRR

inspection Program Branch, NRR (IPAS)

DOCDESK

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ BRANCH 5\\M7? Pa WAC

Ta receive a copy of this document, Indicate in tA E..: "C' O Copy wthout attachment / enclosure

'E" = Copy with attachmenUenclosure T = No

Copf

OFFICE

Rl/DRPp/ k/ l

Rl/DRP//4j

Ril,DRP,

l

NAME

WCook / //~'l

CCowgilf'

Cf Mf

,

DATE

,12/23/97

12Q97

12th)/97

12/ /97

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY