ML20245G151

Discusses Emergency Preparedness Insp Repts 50-352/89-11 & 50-353/89-17 on 890522-26 & 0607 & Forwards Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of 75,000

ML20245G151
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	08/10/1989
From:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Corbin McNeil PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
Shared Package
ML20245G154	List: ML20245G151 ML20245G160
References
NUDOCS 8908150232
Download: ML20245G151 (5)

See also: IR 05000352/1989011

Text

. -

________

, ,

w N

-

. _bW

e

a

f

Aug'ust 10, 1989

Docket Nos. '50-352

50-353

p License Nos. NPF-39

l' - CPPR-107

EA 89-126

g

1 Philadelphia' Electric Company

' ATTN: Mr. C. A. McNeill, Jr.

Executive Vice President

Nuclear-

-Correspondence Control Desk '

P. O. Box-7520-

L Philadelphia, PA 19101

Gentlemen:

Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROP 0kED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY-

-

$75,000

(NRC. Inspection Report-No. 50-352/89-11 and 50-353/89-17)

This refers to the NRC emergency preparedness inspection conducted during

May 22-26, 1989 and June 7,1989 at the Limerick Nuclear Generating Station.

During the inspection,'the report of which was sent to you on June 21, 1989,

violations of NRC requirements were identified. On July ~ 6, .1989, an enforce-

,

ment conference was conducted with you and members of your staff to discuss

the violations, their causes and'your corrective actions.

The-violations,.which are described in the enclosed Notice of Violation

and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty, includei (1) the inability of the

operations staff to effectively utilize the Emergency Action Level (EAL) Event

Classification guides to properly escalate emergency classifications and make

appropriate Protective Action Recommendations (PARS) which would be, required ,

in the event of-an emergency; and (2) failure to promptly correct deficiencies  !

in the emergency preparedness program which were identified during previous

Nuclear-Quality Assurance (NQA) audits.

The.first violation was identified when NRC inspectors conducted walk-through

scenario drills, including postulated equipment failures and changes to key

plant parameters, so as to observe operator actions and ascertain the

effectiveness of operator training. Five control room shifts (including each

Shift Superintendent who is the Interim Emergency Director during an emergency

until your emergency response organization is activated) were evaluated with

respect to their ability to: (1) recognize initiating conditions requiring

entry into the emergency plan; (2) classify events utilizing the EALs; and

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG LIMERICK /EP - 0001.0.0

08/08/89

p

8908150232 890810

PDR

t g

O ADOCK 05000352

PDC

_ _________________z_:________.____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -__ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ .. . _ _ _ a

, . -

. ..

.

.

'

Philadelphia Electric Company 2

(3) escalate emergency classification levels and make appropriate PARS. As

a result of these walk-through drills, the NRC determined that four out of

the five potential Emergency Directors tested were unable to adequately

escalate emergency classifications or make appropriate PARS during a fast

breaking severe accident. This indicates that the training provided to

these individuals was ineffective in assuring that the Interim Emergency

Directors will be able to properly assess initiating conditions and make

correct protective action recommendations.

1

Although you implemented immediate corrective actions by conducting remedial l

emergency response training, the inability of the Interim Emergency Directors j

to properly classify events and make appropriate PARS at the time of the i

previous inspection represents a significant regulatory concern. During a

fast breaking accident, these individuals would have the primary emergency

control responsibilities for classifying events and making the appropriate

recommendations to protect the public until your response organization is

fully activated. The NRC recognizes that your corrective actions have been

effective as verified during a special inspection conducted by the NRC from

July 17-20, 1989.

The second violation involved the failure to correct deficiencies in the

emergency preparedness program that were identified during a Nuclear Quality

Assurance (NQA) audit conducted in 1988. Specifically, the audit, which

received extensive management distribution, identified significant staffing

and training problems as well as a lack of sufficient management and adminis-

trative controls over the emergency preparedness program to ensure the quality l

and readiness of the program. Furthermore, the audit findings were consistent

with findings from NQA audits conducted in 1986 and 1987 for which the NRC

issued a Notice of Violation in February 1988 for failure to adequately

address similar identified deficiencies (IR 50-352/88-01). Notwithstanding

these program weaknesses, these deficiencies continued to exist at the time

of the NRC inspection in May 1989.

The NRC is particularly concerned about the lack of aggressive management

action to correct these deficiencies that were identified during three

successive NQA audits. Further, programmatic weaknesses in the emergency

preparedness area were identified during previous NRC inspections as well

as in the most recent SALP report. The NRC recognizes that prior to 1987,

the emergency preparedness program at Limerick has historically been good

as evidenced by two successive Category 1 SALP ratings. However, the failure

to take prompt actions to correct these identified deficiencies has resulted

in a significant decrease in the effectiveness of the emergency preparedness

program, as evidenced by a SALP 2 rating during the last period compared

to prior SALP 1 ratings. These weaknesses were clearly illustrated by the

first violation involving the inability of the Interim Emergency Directors

to properly classify events due to inadequate training.

The NRC recognizes that, subsequent to the May 1989 inspection, a detailed

root cause analysis was performed and thr.t you have increased management

oversight of this program and have made programmatic and organizational

changes, to ensure the adequate implementation of the emergency plan.

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG LIMERICK /EP - 0002.0.0

08/08/89

!

_.

._ - _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _

'. '..

.

' Philadelphia Electric Company 3

Nonetheless, to emphasize the importance of maintaining increased and

improved management oversight and control of the emergency preparedness

program at both the corporate and site levels, I have been authorized,

after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, and the Deputy

Executive Director for Nuclear Materials Safety, Safeguards and Operations

Support, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition

of Civil Penalty (Notice) in the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars

($75,000) for the violations described in the enclosed Notice. In accord-

ance with the " General Statement cf Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement

Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, 53 Fed. Reg. 40019 (October 13,1988)

(Enforcement Policy), the violations described in the enclosed Notice have

been categorized in the aggregate as a Severity Level III problem to focus

on our underlying concern, namely, a lack of effective management oversight

and involvement in the emergency preparedness program.

The base civil penalty for a Severity Level III problem is $50,000. The

escalation and mitigation factors set forth in the policy were considered

and the following adjustments to the base civil penalty were made: (1) the

violations were identified by the NRC and therefore, escalation of the base

civil penalty amount by 50% is warranted; (2) once the problems were identi-

fied to senior management, your immediate short term corrective actions for

the violations, as set forth in your letter to the NRC dated May 26, 1989,

as well as the detailed root cause analysis and long term corrective action

plan presented at the conference, were considered prompt and extensive and

therefore, 50% mitigation of the penalty amount is warranted; (3) as discussed

earlier, prior notice of the violation involving failure to correct deficien- ,

cies was provided in three successive NQA audits as well as in NRC inspection

findings, therefore, 50% escalation of the base civil penalty amount for this

factor is warranted. Further escalation of the civil penalty was considered >

for this factor, but was not taken due to your good overall performance in

other functional areas. The other escalation and mitigation factors set

forth in the policy were considered and no further adjustment was considered

appropriate. Therefore, on balance, the base civil penalty amount has been

increased by 50%.

You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions

specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. In your

response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional

actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this

Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future

inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is

necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure

will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG LIMERICK /EP - 0003.0.0

08/08/89

_ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ - -

. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

'. '..

.

~

Philadelphia Electric Company 4

-The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject

to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.

Sincerely,. l

\. Original Signed By \

j

l

WILLIAM T. RUSSELL

William T. Russell

Regional Administrator

Enclosure: Notice of Violation and Proposed

Imposition of Civil Penalty '

.

cc w/ encl:

J. S. Kemper, Sr., Senior Vice President - Nuclear Construction

G. M. Leitch, Vice President - Limerick Generating Station

S. J. Kowalski, Vice President - Nuclear Engineering

l D. R. Helwig, General Manager - Nuclear Services j

'

l-

' M. J. McCormick, Jr., Manager - Limerick Generating Station

W. T. Ullrich, Manager - Limerick Unit 2 Startup

A. S. MacAinsh, Manager - Limerick Quality Division

G. A. Hunger, Jr. , Director - Licensing Section

T. B. Conner, Jr. , Esquire

E. J. Bradley, Esquire, Assistant General Counsel

H. D. Honan, Branch Head - Nuclear Engineering Licensing

Public Document Room (PDR)

Local Public Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident Inspector

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

.

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG LIMERICK /EP - 0004.0.0

08/08/89

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ __ 1

, - _ - - _ -

.

,

.

~

Philadelphia Electric Company 5

bec w/ enc 1:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)

Management Assistant, DRMA (w/o enc 1)

Section Chief, DRP

Monte Conner (SALP Reports Only)

PA0 (2) SALP Reports Only

J. Dyer, EDO

PDR

LPDR

SECY

CA

HThompson, DEDS

JTaylor, DEDR

JLieberman, OE

WRussell, RI

DHolody, RI

JGoldberg, OGC

TMurley, NRR

JPartlow, NRR

Enforcement Directors, RII-III

Enforcement Officers, RIV-V

Resident' Inspector

FIngram, GPA/PA

BHayes, 0I

EJordan, AEOD

OE:ES

OE:Chron

OE:EA

DCS

1. -.m

RI:E0 RI:DRSS RI:DRSS RI:DRS

RI:E0gpher/ tim

Chris.y Holody Lazarus Be Knapp

07/1)/89 07/0/89 07/ /89 07/g'5/89 07/q/89  ;

- \

11 R1 RC RI:DRA j RI:RA

Lin ille *g l' Gut' rrez Martin g/ , Russell

.

,(ps

07/h89 07/17/89 0/ / 07/ /89 07/ /89

,. e - ~ ~ -

- ~g

OE

RPRosano

DD:Oi 9 R:I # D:0E DEDS i

HJWong WRussell JLieberman HThompson l

'

8/ /89 8/ /89 / 8/W /89 8/ /89 8/ /89 j

N OFfICIALRECORDCOPY CP PKG LIMERILN/te 1 0 .0.0

l

08/08/89 ]

Ready I

!

pw

eG7 (b 06@4 I

i

I