ML20238E089
| ML20238E089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1987 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20238E085 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-86-176, NUDOCS 8709140133 | |
| Download: ML20238E089 (7) | |
Text
,
p UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-285 Omaha Pubite Power District 5 License No. DPR-40 (Fort Calhoun Station) J' EA 86-176 i
ORDER IMPOSING CIVIL MONETARY PENALTY I I ;
. Omaha Public Power District (licensee) is the holder of operating License No.
DPR-40 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC/ Commission) on
, j August 19, 1973. The license authorizes the licensee to operate the Fort-1 Calhoun Station in accordance with'the conditions specified therein, j
II l 1
A special inspection of the licensee's activities was conducted during September 16-20, 30, October 1-8, November 6-8, 18-22, and December 9-17, 1985.
The results of this inspection indicated that the licensee had not conducted its activities in full compliance with NRC requirements. A written Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty was served upon the licensee by letter dated January 26, 1987. The Notice stated the nature of the violations, the provisions of the NRC's requirements that the licensee had j violated, and the amount of the civil penalty proposed for Violation I. The l licer:see responded to the Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty by letter dated April 10, 1987. '
i i
j t
8709140133 870910
't PDR ADOCK 05000205 ;. 4 G PDR-
~2-III After consideration of the licensee's response and the statements of fact, explanation, and request for reduction of severity level and remission of the civil penalty contained therein, the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations has determined, as set forth in the Appendix to this Order, that Violation I occurred as stated and that the penalty proposed for Violation I designated in the Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty should be imposed.
IV In view of the foregoing and pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2262, and 10 CFR 2.205, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
l The licensee pay a civil penalty in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars (150,000) within 30 days of the date of this Order, by check, draft, or money order, payable to the Treasurer of the United States and mailed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, l ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555.
The licensee may request a hearing within 30 days of the date of this Order. A request for a hearing should be clearly marked as a " Request for an Enforcement Hearing" and shall be addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
y 1: ,
- r. tp s
/
i n f
4 , ,,
J 'I ,
.: 3 [,
i t
.- y Nuclear Regulatory Comission, ATTN: Docuiuf Control ' Desk, Washington', ,D.C.'
V^ '. ,
20555, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regu7,f tory .
Commission, R3gion IV, and a copy tc lthe NRC Resident Inspector, For_t Calhjun';.
- + .
Station. >
/ >
y 4 ;. j If a hearing is requested, the Ccxivnission willLissue an Grder designating the i ,: '
( ,
time and place of the hearing. 1?i the licenug 4 tis to request a hearing 4
- s. ;
within30daysofthedateot~thisOrder,theprovisionsofthisOrde/t,hallbe. e
_, effective without further pruteed'ngs. If payment hqs not-b'een made by that
\
l
,a . 6 time, the matter may be referred to tN; Attorney Generahhor, collection. j e
v
't in the event the licenyee requests a hearing"as provided above, theilisues to be considered at suco hearing shall be: i l b (a) whether the licensee was in violation of the Commission's regulrements as set forth in Violation I of the Notice of Violation and P(oposed Ispesition l t
I i of civil Penalty referenced in Section II above, and be l r'
(b!j whether,4 or,the basis of such violation, this Order should be sustained. 1
,. FORTHENUCLEARREGULATORYCAMMISSION .
, /
Q,- ./
j a s M. Tay1 , De ty Executive Director 3
> ' , for Regional Open@tions f .) ,
Dated at Bethesda, % stylar.d.I j this joMiay of September 1987. ,
{d
, ; 1 .,
. r Il 4
~.
1
, APPENDIX EVALUATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS On January 26, 1987 a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) was issued for violations identified during a'n NRC inspection.
l Omaha Public Power District responded to the Notice on April 10, 1987. The i licensee admitted that Violation I occurred as stated in the Notice; however, the licensee requested reduction of the severity level and remission of the i civil penalty. The NRC's evaluation and conclusion regarding the licensee's arguments are as follows:
Restatement of Violation I 10 CFR 50.59(a) allows the holder of a license to make changes in the facility as described in the safety analysis report (SAR) without prior Commission i l approval unless it involves a change in the technical specifications or l involves an unreviewed safety question. An unreviewed safety question is created if the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the SAR may be increased, if a possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the SAR may be created, or if the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical specification is l
, reduced.
1
{
10 CFR 50.59(b) requires, in part, that the licensee maintain records of changes in the facility to the extent that such changes constitute changes in the facility as described in the SAR. 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 14.14 of the Fort Calhoun Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) states that during a steam generator tube rupture incident, gaseous fission products ,
would be released to atmosphere from the secondary system at the condenser i vacuum pump discharge. Those fission products not discharged in this way would i
be retained by the main steam, feedwater and condensate systems. !
Contrary to the above:
- 1. From March 1980 to January 1985, the licensee failed to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 in that a change was made to the facility as described in the USAR without conducting and documenting a review to determine that the change did not involve an unreviewed safety question. ,
The change to the facility involved the modification of the auxiliary feedwater pump turbine common steam admit valve (YCV-1045) from the " fail close" to the " fail open" design mode, completed in March 1980, without the addition of a safety-related air accumulator system for the individual
" fail open" steam supply valves (YCV-1045 A and B). The inability to i close the " fail open" steam supply valves upon the loss of non-safety-related instrument air would result in an additional fission product release path, not analyzed in the USAR, for a steam generator tube rupture incident. Consequently, the change involved an unreviewed safety question because the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the USAR may have been increased.
I I
Appendix 2. On January 15, 1985, the licensee improperly analyzed the change to its facility.as described above and concluded that an unreviewed safety question did not exist when, in fact, an unreviewed safety question did exist.
This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement I). ( '
Civil Penalty - $50,000.
Summary of Licensee's Response The licensee admits that Violation I occurred but requests remission of the civil penalty based on reevaluation of the violation's severity level. The licensee reviewed the modification to YCV-1045 and admits that previous evaluations of the modification were not sufficiently comprehensive. However, i it was concluded that the modification constituted a system enhancement and that an unreviewed safety question did not exist. {
j In evaluating whether the consequences of an accident, previously evaluated in the USAR may have been increased, the licensee identified three specific 1 events as potentially impacted by the new " fail open" mode of YCV-1045. Of i the analyses of the three events, only the analysis for the steam generator '
tube rupture (SGTR) event demonstrated an increased impact, revealing a small increase in the radiological consequences. Because the SGTR analysis of Section 14.14.5 of the USAR remained the bounding analysis; the licensee argues that neither the probability of occurrence or consequences of an equipment malfunction or accident previously identified were increased. To further support this conclusion the licensee discusses the probable existence of the release path directly to the atmosphere upon loss of instrument air when YCV-1045 was a " fail close" valve. The licensee argues that even as a " fail close" valve, YCV-1045 would have opened on residual system air pressure, so that the release path would have previously existed and was not created by the modification. i The licensee's response also addresses the other criteria for an unreviewed safety question delineated in 10 CFR 50.59 and concludes neither was applicable.
In the licensee's review of whether the margin of safety as defined in the i basis for any Technical Specification is reduced, the discussion focuses on I containment integrity. The licensee concludes that, because YCV-1045 is !
required to be open during certain accident conditions, containment integrity l l is unaffected by the valve's " fail open" design.
NRC Evaluation of Licensee's Response I
The NRC staff has carefully reviewed the licensee's response and has concluded i that an unreviewed safety question did exist. The staff agrees with the licensee that with the modification of YCV-1045 to a " fail o)en" valve, system reliability was improved. However, the improvement of relia >ility without the )
addition of safety-related accumulators for valves YCV-1045 A/B introduced an !
unanalyzed release path through YCV-1045. A sufficiently comprehensive safety I analysis / safety evaluation performed in 1979, 1983, or 1985 should have !
identified that the modification resulted in the introduction of a steam release i path to the environment which was not previously considered in USAR Section ;
I Appendix 14.14.2 and which, as demonstrated by the licensee, increased the radiological consequences of the SGTR event. Contrary to the licasee's argument, the consequences of a configuration change to a system described in the safety analysis report do not have to exceed those of the-bounding analysis to constitute an unreviewed safety question. The consequences of a change in a system configuration need only result in an increase in the consequences of an accident when compared to those for that accident as previously analyzed.
If the specific accident conditions were not previously analyzed then an unreviewed safety question exists until the analysis is performed.
With regard to the licensee's argument that the release path existed prior ,
to the modification because sufficient instrument air pressure would have. '
remained in the system to open YCV-1045, the NRC staff concludes that this is only a supposition. The licensee has not provided any factual basis in the form of an analysis to support this hypothesis.
Since Violation I only addressed the existence of an unreviewed safety question because the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the USAR may have been increased (10 CFR 50.59(2)(1)), the staff did not review in detail the licensee's response addressing the other criteria for an unreviewed safety question. However, the staff does not agree with the licensee's contention regarding containment isolation in that, the licensee did not adequately address the containment isolation function of valve YCV-1045, since the valve, along with valves HCV-1041 and 1042, provides isolation capability for a system closed to the containment atmosphere. The modified " fail open" mode of valve YCV-1045 no longer provided the isolation function as designed. As such, during a loss-of-coolant accident, concurrent with steam generator leakage, a continuing release of radioactive steam to the environment via YCV-1045 would occur until the valve was isolated manually-locally.
l Consequently, because between March 1980 and January 1985 an unreviewed safety l question did exist when valve YCV-1045 was modified, the violation is a apro-l priately categorized as a Severity Level III violation and therefore, t1e licensee's request for remission of the civil penalty based on the reduction in severity level of the violation is not deemed to be appropriate.
NRC Conclusion After careful consideration of the licensee's response, the NRC staff concludes that the violation is significant in that an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59 existed and the violation is appropriately classified as a Severity Level III violation. Further, the licensee has not provided a sufficient basis for remission of the civil penalty. Consequently, the proposed civil penalty in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) should be imposed.
l I
-, 1 SEP 101987 ,
Omaha Public Power District 1
DISTRIBUTION ,
bec w/ enc 1:
{
SECY 1 CA J TMurley, NRR JMTaylor, DEDR0 l JLieberman, OE ,
SSchinki, DGC "-
' Enforcement Officers % I RI, RII, RIII, RV y [j GJohnson, RM s HDenton, OGPA EJordan, AE0D 3 E.} j SConnelly, DIA @ $;
OE:ES File :'
OE:EA File , $!
DCS RIV Distribution:
RMartin EJohnson JGagliardo DHunter liMurphy JGilliland (1tr hd)
GSanborn DPowers RIV Files MIS Coordinator Resident Inspector j i
l l
1 i
g,[jM \- ,
OE w, RA:RI OGC 0:hE l' JLuEhman RDMartin SSohinki Jtieberman J1 .or 9/'l-/87 q/$/87- j/j/87 J/*)/87 0/87
,- 1 8 l i .
l
(
p I ne
'l
'l
, i so .
.i l
% f 4
~
t
.; 3 L
i f '
t 5
M i.
- l. ~
M l' t- v> '
j o <l > ..
, i s ')
f3. y ' ' '
! tr 2: l (n Aw , ,
D' W r-i I
8 l
I(
1 1
i k
J c ,
)
1 1
l l
1 i
t r-
)
i 1
4 'l 3 <" .
t t
l 4
1 l
l 1
l l
\
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _