ML20217B839
| ML20217B839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1998 |
| From: | Barron H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-05.062, RTR-REGGD-5.062 50-369-97-19, 50-370-97-19, NUDOCS 9804230139 | |
| Download: ML20217B839 (4) | |
Text
s.
P-Duke F'ower Company A Dubt Ewg Compny McGuire Nudear Station MG01VP 12700 Hagers Ferry Rd.
liuntersville, NC 28078-9340 H.B.Harron Via hident. McGuire (704) 87S-4800 omCE Nudear Generation Department (704) 87S-4809 Mx April 10,1998 t
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATIN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555 l
Attached is a Reply to a Notice of Violation contained in inspection report 50-369/97-19 and 50-370/97-19 regarding notification requirements under 10 CFR Part 73 Appendix G.
This reply is submitted in l
accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. This reply does not contain safeguards, privacy or l
proprietary information.
Duke Energy acknowledges that the failure to make a one hour notification was a violation of regulatory requirements. As requested in the NRC letter of March 11,1998 Duke has added a corrective action to j
j prevent further violations associated with reportmg secunty events.
j l
CoTective actions 112 and III in this violation response are regulatory commitments. Please contact Mike Cash (704) 875-4117 for questicns regarding this response.
l l
/
H.B. Barron dh Vice Presiden.t McGuire Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation
/
1
~
l 9804230139 980410 PDR ADOCK 05000369 G
cc:
LA. Reyes Regional Administrator Region 11 Nuclear Regulatory Commission S.M. Shaffer Senior Resident Inspector McGuire Nuclear Station Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
t
Reply to a Notice of Violation I. Reason for Violation I(A) Restatement of Violation "This is a Severity hvelIV violation (Supplement Ill) 10 CFR 73.71 (b) requires licensees subject to the provisions of 73.55 to notify the NRC Operations Center within one hour after discovery of the safeguards events described in paragraph I(a) (2) of Appendix G to Part 73.
Appendit G to Part 73, paragraph I(a) (2). requires that any event in which there is reason to believe that a person has committed or caused or attempted to commit or cause, or has made a credible threat to commit or cause significant physical damage to a power reactor or its equipment to be reported within one hour ofdiscovery.
Contrary to the above, an event occurred in which a person or persons made a credible threat to commit or cause significant physical damage to a power reactor or its equipment and it was not reported within one hour of discovery to the NRC Operations Center. "
Duke agrees that this is a violation of regulatory requirements and agrees with the facts as stated in the notice of violation.
I(H) Interpretation of 10 CFR Part 73 Appendix G Site staff and management reviewed the section of Part 73 cited in this Notice of Violation as part of the initial reportability determination. Of particular importance to this initial determination of reportability is the phrase,
"..Sigraficant physical damage to a power reactor or any facility possessing SSNM or its equipment.. "
In the opinion of the individuals involved in the original determination of reportability the damage to the seals was not significant physical damage. This determination was based on a review of the nuclear safety consequences of the damage. The logic was that significance of damage was to be judged by effect of the damaged equipment on plant nuclear safety. The seals were not in service at the time and the reactor was in no MODE condition, therefore the seals were not providing a nuclear safety function. In addition. the seals would be tested prior to restart which would guarantee the discovery of the damaged seals prior to them being placed in service. Therefore, the damaged seals did not represent a condition adverse to nuclear safety and this served as the basis for concluding the damage was not significant.
Further review and research by Duke Regulatory Compliance staff found the following definition for significant physical damage in Regulatory Guide 5.62,
".. Damage to the extent that thefacility, equipment, transport, orfuel cannot perform its normalfemction..,"
1
i The damaged seals were cut thru-wall in some locations, this would prevent them from pressurizing as rey,uired by design. This damage would most likely have prevented the seals from performing their intended function in this condition. Based on this regulatory guidance Duke made a determination that the damage to the seals would constitute significant physical damage and therefore would be reportable. It should he noted that a Regulatory Guide does not constitute a regulatory requirement but specifies one acceptable method to meet regulatory requirements.
I(C) Summary of Reason for Violation The original determination on reportability was a reasonable interpretation although further research uncovered regulatory guidance that contradicts that determination. Duke's current position is that this condition was reportable using the guidance for significant physical damage provided in Regulatory Guide 5.62.
In summary, the reason for the violation was a misinterpretation of the term "significant physical damage" as it relates to the reportability criteria of 10 CFR Part 73 Appendix G.
II. Correcthe steps that have been taken and results achieved
- 1. Notification via Emergency Notification System under 10 CFR 73 Appendix G
- 2. Special Report 370/97.04(S) filed in LER format to the NRC and associated corrective actions.
Ill. Corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations Security stalf will ensure that the Nuclear Security Manual provides guidance from Regulatory Guide 5.62 regarding reportability of tampering events as it relates to significant physical damage. (PIP 2-M97-4569)
IV. Date when full compliance will be achieved McGuire Nuclear Station is currently in full compliance t
2