ML20247Q747

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Recommends Use of Enforcement Discretion Per 10CFR2,App C,Section V.G.2 Re Regulatory Actions Against Util as Result of Fire Barrier Deficiencies Identified & Corrected During Current Extended Outage
ML20247Q747
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 10/03/1988
From: Blough A
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Collins S
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20247Q704 List:
References
FOIA-88-284, FOIA-88-285, FOIA-88-286, FOIA-88-287, FOIA-88-519, FOIA-89-A-10, FOIA-89-A-11, FOIA-89-A-12, FOIA-89-A-13, FOIA-89-A-9 NUDOCS 8906070032
Download: ML20247Q747 (3)
v • d • e


Text

_- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - .

1 e- OCT 031988 )

J MEMORANDUM FOR: Samuel J. Collins, Deputy Director Division of. Reactor Projects a l

THRU: James T. Wiggins, Chief i Reactor Projects Branch No. 3 FROM: A. Randy Blough, Chief Reactor Projects Section No. 3B

SUBJECT:

ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION FOR PILGRIM FIRE BARRIER DEFICIENCIES

'This memorandum recommends the 'use of enforcement discretion, per 10 CFR 2, Appendix C, Section. V.G.2, regarding regulatory actions against Boston Edison Company (BECo) as a result of fire barrier deficiencies identified and cor-rected at Pilgrim during the current extended outage.

BACKGROUND

' The fire barrier deficiencies at Pilgrim were identified by BECo and consisted of multiple fire barrier penetration seals which were inoperable due to either (1) a lack of documentation verifying the adecuacy of the seals, (2) material degradation of the reals, or (3) licensee uncertainty over seal requirements.

These deficiencies were reported to the NRC in various LERs and through dis-cussions with the resident inspectors. In response to. tne fire barrier pene-tration problems, the licensee performed an extensive fire barrier inspection and upgrade program, as described in the attached excerpt from Region I Inspection Report No. 50-293/58-19. This upgrace program was found to be acceptable.

The initial licensee fire barrier penetration insoe:tions associated with the above upgrade program resulted in 3900 of 5200 penetration seals not meeting acceptance criteria. A detailed evaluation of the type and location of barrier deficiencies, if undertaken, would probably support, on technical merits, citing the previous fire barrier inoperabilities collectively as a Severity Level III violation.

Pilgrim is presently classified by NRC management as a plant in an extended shutdown to correct areas of previous poor performance. Fire protection was rated as Category 3 in the SALP period (11/85-1/27) and as Category 2 in the most current period (2/87-5/88). The unit has been shutdown, in conjunction with a Confi rmato ry Action Letter, since April 1986 to make substantial improvements in the management and material condition of the plant. Included were fire protection equipment and program improvements. During the latter two-thirds of the current extended outage, the licensee has devoted significant resources to improving fire protection. Thus, based on the status of the plant and the nature of the fire barrier deficiencies. :'s:eetionary enforcement appears warranted in this case under the newly apor:.e: :rovisions of 10 CFR 2, Appendix C.

8906070032 890601 r <ja n arma90n PDR FDIA PDR m," ,;1ior,s . -~

y CARREYB9-A-9 ew  %

FDik- $$2AY tv- $4,tv- y/,

h . .

[ VC Memorandum for Samuel J. Collins e l

007 0 31988 lD'ISCUSSION

- The NRC Enforcement Policy, '10 CFR- 2 Appendix C, provides in Section V.G. .for the exercise of discretion in- handling certain enforcement actions. Item 2 of that'section states that the NRC may refrain from issuing a notice of violation

.or at proposed civil penalty for violations that meet all the following criteria:

1. NRC has taken . significant enforcement' action based upon .a major safety 1 event contributing to an extended shutdown of an operating reactor .. ~ or

.the licensee is forced into an extended shutdown or work stoppage'.related to generally poor performance over a long period; the licensee has developed -and is aggressively implementing during the shutdown a compre-hensive program '.for problem identification and correction; and NRC con-currence is 'needed by the licensee prior to restart.

2. Nun-willful violations are identified by the licensee . ..

3, The violations are based upon activities of the licensee prior to the events leading to the shutdown, and

4. .The non-willful violations would normally not be categorized as. higher than Severity Level III violations under the NRC Enforcement Policy.

I have reviewed the fire barrier penetration deficiency issue and the provis-ions - for- use of ' enforcement discretion. This case appears to meet all the criteria for enforcement discretion and to be precisely the type of situation for which the provisions of 10 CFR 2 Appendix C Section V.G.2 are intended. I-have discussed.possible enforcement actions for this case with members of the Pilgrim Restart Panel, the appropriate DRS Section Chief, and the Region I Enforcement Of ficer. All agree that enforcement discretion is appropriate in this case.

The procedures for administration of enforcement discretion are not delineate'd in > 10 CFR 2, Appendix C. There are also no clear instructions regarding the process and internal approvals required to take such action in NRC instructions and procedures. Past cases (i.e. , maintenance deficiencies at Palisades in the

~

198i.-1986 time period; see attached) have been handled in a manner similar to .

. standard enforcement practices, although abbreviated. An enforcement conference was held with the licensee to ascertain their corrective actions in response to the event. The imposition of a Notice of Violation and proposed Civil' Penalty was waived in favor of a discussion of the violation and the reasons for taking discretionary enforcement in an inspection report cover letter signed by the Regional Administrator. The decision of Regional management to take such discretionary enforcement action was also discussed and approved by Headquarters.

^ '

l00T us 198g l ' Memorandum for Samuel J. Collins .3 -.

I t .

t. gn, .
f. '

It is'my belief that a'n enforcement conference on this issue at this time would

(. not serve any usef ul purpose. The licensee's corrective actions :in response , to -

the degraded l fire barriers are well- known to the NRC and are considered '

extensive and adequate. No additional .information or licensee corrective actions regarding this issue would be gained by an enforcement conference with the licensee. Therefore, 3 recommend tnat an enforcement conference be waived; and the decision to take disc' retionary enforcement . action.. on the issue . be.

documented in 'a letter- from NRC Region I .to the licensee. A draft of the

' recommended' letter is included in the Attachments to this letter. The-letter

- should be sent to Headquarters ' for those concurrences deemed appropriate by the

' Region I Enforcement Officer before being signed .out of Region I. This.

procedure will ensure that' the action taken will receive the appropriate-level of NRC management attention, avoid the needless expenditure.of resources

- to an. enforcement conference, and be consistent with NRC precedent on this issue.

A. Randy Blou . Chief Reactor Projects Section No. 3B Attachments':

As stated' cc w/ Attachments:

D. Holody,'EO-bec w/ Attachments:

J. Wiggins, DRP R. Blough, DRP L. Doerflein, DRP M.' Kohl, ORP J. Durri DRS C.,. Anderson, DRS

__3 -__.____.u____.___________________________________________._____________. ___

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20247Q747&oldid=3272627"