ML20236D669

Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $75,000.Violations Noted:Inoperable Room Coolers & Excessive Svc Water Temp

ML20236D669
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	03/13/1989
From:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236D667	List: IR 05000333/1988023 ML20236D669
References
EA-88-304, NUDOCS 8903230211
Download: ML20236D669 (4)

Text

_ .___ _____ - _ _

NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY New York Power Authority Docket No. 50-333 FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Station License No. DPR-59 EA 88-304 During NRC inspections conducted on August 8 - October 5, 1988 and October 6 -

November 25, 1988, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Action,"

10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular violations and associated civil penalty are set forth below:

I. VIOLATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH INOPERABLE ROOM COOLERS A. Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.11.8 requires that crescent area ventilation and cooling equipment shall be operable on a continuous basis whenever certain Emergency i

Core Cooling System (s) (ECCS) are required to be operable in accordance with Technical Specification LCO 3.5 A, 3.5.B, and 3.5.C. Further, if more than one unit cooler serving ECCS components in the same compartment are made or found to be inoperable, all ECCS components in that compartment shall be considered to be inoperable, and appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with Technical Specifications 3.5. A, 3.5.C, or 3.5.0 to place the reactor in the cold shutdown condition within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

Contrary to the above, for an indeterminate period of time prior to October 1988, more than one crescent area unit cooler serving the ECCS components were inoperable in each of the two compartments because of inadequate heat transfer capability; however, the affected ECCS components were not declared inoperable and action was not taken to shut down the reactor within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

B. Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.11.8 requires that the crescent area unit coolers be checked once every three months to verify their ability to perform their intended function.

Contrary to the above, the tests of the crescent area unit coolers performed prior to October 1988 were inadequate to verify that the unit coolers would perform their intended safety function. The tests were inadequate in that they only ensured that the fans were operating and the filters were not clogged, but did not verify that the coolers 4 had adequate cooling water flow to ensure that the capability existed for removing their design heat load from the crescent areas during certain design basis accidents.

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG FITZPATRICK EA 88-304 -

0005.0.0 e903230211 890313 03/08/89 PDR ADOCK 05000333 g PDC

d

. NOTICE OF VIOLATION.

-I C. 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI requires, in part, that' measures-shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected.

, Contrary to.the above, in July-1987, a report of a ventilation study  ;

of unit cooler rooms performed by Flakt,1Inc. a licensee contractor, '  ;

indicated that service water flow to the reactor building cresent '

area unit coolers may have been obstructed, and the' licensee's Mechanical Design and Analyses Group confirmed this finding in January 1988; however, as of October 1988, ' action had not been taken to correct this problem.

II. VIOLATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE A. 10 CFR 50.59(a) allows the holde'r of a license to make changes j in the facility as described in the safety analysis report (SAR).

without prior Commission approval unless it involves a change in the' Technical Specifications or 'an unreviewed safety question. 10;CFR.

50.59(b) requires, in part, that records of these changes be main -

tained,'and-these records shall include a written safety evaluation which provides the basis for the determination that the change does not involve an unreviewed. safety. question.

Section 6.5.1 of the Fitzpatrick ' Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) lists the assumptions used to calc ~ulate the. suppression pool tempora-ture and minimum containment pressure following the design basis LOCA, and states that the maximum assumed inlet temperature for safety related service water systems is 77 F.

Contrary to the above, between August 3-17, 1988, a change was made to the facility as described in'the FSAR in that.the reactor was operated when the safety related service water inlet temperature was above 77 F (as high as 79.5 F), and prior to or during that time, a written safety evaluation did not exist to verify that the condition  ;

did not involve an unreviewed safety question.

B. 10 CFR 50.72(b)(11)(B) requires, in part, that the licensee shall notify the NRC Operations Center within one hour of any event or  ;

condition during operation that results in a condition that is _

outside the design basis of the plant. I Contrary to the above, between August 3-17, 1988, the reactor-  ;

operated in a condition outside the design basis of the plant (as set forth in Violation II. A above), and during that time, the NRC Operations Center was not notified of this condition.

c Collectively, the violations set forth above have been categorized in the' aggregate as a Severity Level III problem. (Supplement I)'

Civil Penalty - $75,000 (Assessed equally among the violations) '

0FFICIAL. RECORD COPY' CP PKG FITZPATRICK EA 88-304'-

03/08/89 j l

- . . j 1

, N,0TICE OF C OLATION I I

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Power Authority of the State of New York is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to

'the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, within 30 days of.the date.of this Notice. .This reply should be clearly marked as a

" Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for'each alleged violation:

(1) admission or denial of the alleged violation",'(2) the reasons for the vio-lation if admitted, (3) the corrective-steps that have been taken and the:results achieved, (4) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further viola-tions, and (5) 'the date.when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate L reply is'not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. ' Consi-doration_ may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown.  !

Under the authority ~of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S,C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under. oath or affirmation.

Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, the Licensee may pay'the civil penalty by letter to the Director, Office j of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft,'or .i money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the amount of the 'l civil penalty proposed above, or may protest imposition.of the civil penalty in whole or in part by u written answer addressed to the Director,.0f fice of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Should the Licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the civil penalty will be- ,

issued. Should the Licensee elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, in whole or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an " Answer to a Notice of Violation" and may (1) deny the violation (s) listed in this Notice in whole or in part, (2) demonstate extenu- 4 ating' circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons l why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting,the civil penalty, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty.

In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the five factors addressed in Section V.B of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201, but may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference-(e.g.,

citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. The attention of the Licensee is directed * ; the other provision of 10 CFR 2.-205 regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty.

Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been deter-mined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this 1 matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and'the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282c. i f

( j L{

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG FITZPATRICK EA 88-304 -  !

0007.0.0 '

03/08/89 i_ ____- _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~

., , N0TICE OF VIOLATION 1

The responses to the Director, Office of Enforcement, noted above (Reply.to a Notice of Violation, letter with payment of civil penalty, and Answer to a Notice of Violation) should be addressed to: Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory-Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a cony to the Regional Administrator, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 and'a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector, at Fitzf atrick.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Orfrinal Signed By U11:.;J. T. RUSSELL William T. Russell Regional Administrator Dated a King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this/J day of March 1989 1

i i

k 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG FITZPATRICK EA 88-304 -

0008.0.0 03/08/89 I

l  !

l . . _ _ _ _ .

I