ML20235L711
| ML20235L711 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1987 |
| From: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710050573 | |
| Download: ML20235L711 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000413/1987020
Text
. . . . . .
._____
.
.
C[M
L
'
j
SEP 3 01987
Docket Nos. 50-413, 50-414
l
Duke Power Company
ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President
Nuclear Production Department
422 South Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28242
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: DENIAL OF VIOLATION
(NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-413/87-20 AND 50-414/87-20)
Thank you for your response of August 28, 1987, to our Notice of Violation
issued on July 30, 1987, concerning licensed activities conducted at your
Catawba facility.
We have evaluated your response and concluded, for the reasons given in the
enclosure to this letter, that the violation occurred as stated in the Notice
of Violation.
Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.201(a), please submit
to this office within 30 days of the date of this letter a written statement
that describes:
(1) corrective steps which have been taken and the results
achieved; (2) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations;
and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedure
of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
J. Nelson Grace
Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee Response
cc w/ encl:
J. W. Hampton, Station Manager
Senior Resident Inspector - McGuire
bec w/ enc 1:
(See page 2)
8710050573 870930
ADDCK 05000413
G
IfI
uc t
..
-.
_ _
_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
. ___ . - _
_
_
- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
__ -
_-_
__
_
_-_
..
.
Duke Power Company
2
SEP 3 0 1987j.
-bec w/ enc 1:
K. N. Jabbour, NRR
NRC Resident Inspector
Document Control Desk
State of South Carolina
<
l
l
1
1
l
l
l
l
4
l
l
!
l
\\
l
RII
RII
Rll
R11
llf
0
l
,j,'e
'
lPeebles
.&~$
41
BBonser:er
VBrownlee
eyes
irnst
i
09/cg(/,87
09/3)]87
09/p/87
9/)f/87
09/M/87
e9/yg/f7
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.
. . . _ _ _ . .
j
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
___ _ ___-__
. . .
,
'
ENCLOSURE
STAFF ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE RESPONSE
.!
The NRC Regional staff has reviewed and evaluated Duke Power Company's (DPC)
response to the Notice of Violation.
Restatement of Duke's Position
k
DPC denied the violation on the basis that they have implemented written
procedures to ensure that reportable events are thoroughly and consistently
l
investigated. . Also, Duke stated that Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.33, Revision 2,
Appendix ~ A,
does not address investigative activities performed by an
Independent Safety Engineering Group and, therefore, does not apply.
)
NRC Staff Position
It is not intended that RG 1.33, Appendix A specifically list all safety-
related activities that should be covered by written procedures during the
operation phase of a nuclear power plant.
Independent investigation of events
which have resulted in conditions adverse to safety is clearly an activity
affecting the safe operation of Catawba. The staff, therefore, finds that the
,
requirements established- in RG 1.33, Revision 2 Appendix A, do include the
l
investigative activities performed as a result of the mispositioned valve.
Additionally, the NRC considers it disturbing that DPC management considered
the investigation that was* performed to be acceptable. The personnel involved
clearly did not adequately evaluate the specific hardware involved in a
recurring event- until after a request for additional evaluation was made by
the Resident Inspectors.
We consider that close examination of hardware in
the field, such as the valve with a loose and mispositioned handwheel which
contributed to this problem, to be an important part of the investigative
process.
Our position, therefore, remains the same.
DPC did not thoroughly
investigate, determine the cause, and evaluate the full recurring event
j
implications for valve INSPT5040 inappropriately remaining shut from
l
April 7 to April 24, 1987, causing Containment Pressure Channel IV to be
The staff concludes that the violation, as stated in the Notice of Violation,
is valid.
)
t
i
,-
i
l