Information Notice 1979-35, Control of Maintenance & Essential Equipment: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| page count = 10 | | page count = 10 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES SSINS No.: | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES SSINS No.: 6870 NUCLEAR REGULATORY | ||
COMMISSION | |||
Accessions | |||
Mo.: OFFICE OF INSPECTION | |||
AND ENFORCEMENT | |||
7910250510 | |||
WASHINGTON, -D.C. 20555 December 31, 1979 IE Information | |||
Notice No. 79-35 CONTROL OF MAINTENANCE | |||
AND ESSENTIAL | |||
EnUIPMENT Description | |||
of Circumstances: | |||
Enclosed is a copy of a recent enforcement | |||
}} | action against Duquesne Light Company.A coDy of this action is being forwarded | ||
to all utilities | |||
with a power reactor operating | |||
license or a construction | |||
permit. This is being done to apprise you of a serious condition | |||
which revealed an apparent weakness in facility control of maintenance | |||
and essential | |||
equipment. | |||
You should review your existinq procedures | |||
and control for independent | |||
verification | |||
of operability | |||
of redundant | |||
counterpart | |||
equipment | |||
when an essential | |||
component, subsystem, or system is determined | |||
inoperable. | |||
Operability | |||
is defined as follows: A system, subsystem, train, component | |||
or device shall be OPERABLE or have OPERABILITY | |||
when it is capable of performing | |||
its specified | |||
functionts). | |||
Implicit in this definition | |||
shall be the assumption | |||
that all necessary attendant | |||
instrumentation, controls, normal and emergency | |||
electrical | |||
power sources, coolinq or seal water, lubrication | |||
or other auxiliary | |||
equipment that are required for the system, subsystem, train, component | |||
or device to perform its function(s) | |||
are also capable of performing | |||
their related support function(s). | |||
If you have any Questions | |||
reqardina | |||
this matter, please contact the Director of the NRC Regional Office in which your facilities | |||
are located. No written response to this IE Information | |||
Notice is required.Enclosures: | |||
1. Letter to Duguesne Light Company from V. Stello, Jr., dtd. 12/5/79 2. Recently Issued IE Information | |||
Notices | |||
IE Information | |||
Notice No. 79-35 December ,31 1979 Enclosure RECENTLY ISSUED IE INFORMATION | |||
===NOTICES Information=== | |||
Notice No.Subject Date Issued Issued To 79-34 79-33 79-32 79-31 79-30 79-29 79-28 Inadequate | |||
Desiqn of Safety-Related | |||
===Heat Exchangers=== | |||
Improper Closure of Primary Containment | |||
Access Hatches Separation | |||
of Electrical | |||
Cables for HPCI and ADS Use of Incorrect | |||
Amplified Response Spectra (ARS)Reportinq | |||
of Defects and Noncompliance, 10 CFR Part 21.Loss of NonSafety-Related | |||
Reactor Coolant System Instrumentation | |||
During Operation Overloading | |||
of Structural | |||
Elements Due to Pipe Support Loads Steam Generator | |||
===Tube Ruptures At Two PWR Facilities=== | |||
Attempted | |||
===Damane To New Fuel Assemblies=== | |||
Breach of Containment | |||
Integrity Reactor Trips At Turkey Point Units 3 And 4 12/6/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holding OLs and CPs and vendors inspected | |||
by LCVIP 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holding OLs or CPs 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
with an OL or CP 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holdinq OLs and CPs 11/9/79 All Fuel Facilities, research reactors, and power reactors with an OL or CP 12/27/79 All holders of power reactor OLs and CPs 12/21/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holdinc OLs and CPs 12/21/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holding OLs and CPs 12/13/79 All holders of power reactor OLs and CPs 79-27 79-12A 79-26 79-25 11/5/79 10/1/79 All power reactor facilities | |||
holdina OLs and CPs All power facilities | |||
with an nL or a CP | |||
Docket No. 50-334 December 5, 1979 Duquesne Light Company ATTN: Mr. Stanley G. Schaeffer President 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania | |||
15219 Gentlemen: | |||
On November 27, 1979, the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, was operated for about two (2) hours in a condition | |||
which exceeded the Limiting Conditions | |||
for Operation. | |||
This matter was brought to the attention | |||
of our inspector | |||
at your facility in a timely fashion, and your subsequent | |||
action to correct the condition | |||
was expeditious. | |||
Nevertheless, this condition | |||
rendered a part of the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) unavailable | |||
for automatic | |||
start and injection | |||
of coolant into the reactor coolant system (RCS) if the need had occurred concur-rent with the loss of offsite power (the design basis). This unavailability | |||
of ECCS constitutes | |||
a serious matter which reveals an apparent weakness in your control of maintenance | |||
and essential | |||
equipment. | |||
Therefore, we propose to impose a civil penalty for the item of noncompliance | |||
set forth in Appendix A to this letter in the amount of $5,000. Appendix B is a Notice of Proposed Imposition | |||
of Civil Penalties. | |||
You are required to respond to this letter and in preparing | |||
your response, you should follow the instructions | |||
in Appendices | |||
A and B.In addition to the civil penalty, we are issuing the enclosed Order (Appendix | |||
C)effective | |||
Immediately. | |||
This Order requires that your administrative | |||
control of licensed activities | |||
involving | |||
operating | |||
and maintenance | |||
of safety equipment verifies availability | |||
of all required equipment | |||
when a counterpart | |||
is removed from an operable status. This Order further requires that you formally review and report your actions to prevent recurrence: | |||
It also requires that you meet publicly on January 25, 1980, with the Director, Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement, at a location near the Beaver Valley Power Station, to discuss your evaluation | |||
of this conditon and your corrective | |||
actions to prevent recurrence. | |||
We will inform you of the location and time of the meeting. | |||
Duquesne Light Company-2 -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 enclosures | |||
will be placed in the Commission's | |||
Public Document Room.Sincerely, Victor Stello, Jr.Director Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement | |||
Enclosure: | |||
1. Appendix A, Notice of Violation 2. Appendix B, Notice of Proposed Imposition | |||
of Civil Penalties 3. Appendix C, Order Modifying | |||
License cc: C. N. Dunn, Vice President, Operations | |||
Division F. Bissert, Technical | |||
Assistant | |||
Nuclear R. WIashabaugh, QA Manager J. Werling, Station Superintendent | |||
G. Moore, General Superintendent, J. J. Carey, Nuclear Technical | |||
Assistant R. Martin, Nuclear Engineer | |||
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 Pittsburqh, Pennsylvania | |||
15219 License No. DPR 66 This refers to the inspection | |||
conducted | |||
by the NRC Resident Inspector | |||
at the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, of activities | |||
authorized | |||
by NRC License No. DPR 66.During the inspection | |||
conducted | |||
on November 27, 1979, the following | |||
item of noncompliance | |||
was identified. | |||
Technical | |||
Specification | |||
3.5.2 states that with the plant in Mode 1 (Power Operation), two separate and independent | |||
ECCS subsystems | |||
shall be operable, and further states in section 3.5.2.c that each subsystem | |||
shall include an operable flow path caoable of taking suction from the refueling | |||
water storage tank upon initiation | |||
of a safety injection | |||
signal.Technical | |||
Specification | |||
1.6 defines "operable" to include the assumption | |||
that all necessary | |||
attendant | |||
instrumentation, controls, electric power, cooling or seal water, lubrication | |||
or other auxiliary | |||
equipment | |||
that are required for the system, subsystem, train, component | |||
or device to perform its function(s) | |||
are also capable of performing | |||
their related safety function(s). | |||
Contrary to the above, on November 27, 1979, from approximately | |||
8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., maintenance | |||
activities | |||
rendered both ECCS subsystems | |||
inoperable | |||
in that a) refueling | |||
water storage tank isolation | |||
valve MOV-CH-115D | |||
was closed and incapable | |||
of automatic | |||
opening in response to a safety injection | |||
signal, and b) refueling | |||
water storage tank isolation | |||
valve MOV-CH-115B, in the redundant subsystem, was closed, had no emergency | |||
power available, and thus was incapable of automatic | |||
opening In response to a safety injection | |||
signal if there had been a condition | |||
of loss of offsite power.This violation | |||
had the potential | |||
for causing or contributing | |||
to an occurrence | |||
related to health and safety (Civil Penalty $5,000). | |||
APPENDIX B NOTICE OF PROPOSED IMPOSITION | |||
OF CIVIL PENALTIES Duquesne Light Company nocket No. 50-334 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania | |||
15219 License No. DPR-66 This office has considered | |||
the enforcement | |||
options available | |||
to the MRC including | |||
administrative | |||
actions in the form of written notices of violation, civil monetary penalties, and orders pertaining | |||
to the modification, suspension | |||
or revocation | |||
of a license. Based on these considerations, we propose to impose civil penalties | |||
pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (42 USC 2282), and to 10 CFR 2.205 in the cumulative | |||
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) for the specific items of noncompliance | |||
set forth in Appendix A to the cover letter. In proposing | |||
to impose civil penal-ties pursuant to this section of the Act and in fixing the proposed amount of the penalties, the factors identified | |||
in the Statements | |||
of Consideration | |||
published | |||
in the Federal Register with the rule-making | |||
action which adopted 10 CFR 2.205 (36 FR 16894) August 26, 1971, and the "Criteria | |||
for Determining | |||
Enforcement | |||
Action," which was sent to NRC licensees | |||
on December 31, 1974, have been taken into account.Duquesne Light Company may, within twenty (20) days of the receipt of this notice pay the civil penalties | |||
in the cumulative | |||
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) or may protest the imposition | |||
of the civil penalties | |||
in whole or in part by a written answer. Should Duquesne Light Company fail to answer within the time specified, this office will issue an order imposing the civil penalties | |||
in the amount proposed above. Should Duquesne Light Company elect to file an answer protesting | |||
the civil penalties, such an answer may (a) deny the items of noncompliance | |||
listed in the Notice of Violation | |||
in whole or in part, (b) demonstrate | |||
extenuating | |||
circumstances, (c) show error in the Notice of Violation, (d) show other reasons why the penalties | |||
should not be imposed.In addition, to protesting | |||
the civil penalties | |||
in whole or in part, such answer may request remission | |||
or mitigation | |||
of the penalties. | |||
Any written answer in accordance | |||
with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately | |||
from the statement | |||
or explanation | |||
in reply pursuant to 2.201, but may incorporate | |||
by specific reference (e.g., giving page and paragraph | |||
numbers)to avoid repetition. | |||
Duquesne Light Company's | |||
attention | |||
is directed to the other provisions | |||
of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding, in particular, failure. to answer and ensuing orders;answer, consideration | |||
by this office, and ensuing orders; requests for hearings, hearings and ensuing orders; compromise, and collection. | |||
Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which has been subsequently | |||
determined | |||
in accordance | |||
with the applicable | |||
provisions | |||
of 10 CFR 2.205, the 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 234.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC 2282). | |||
APPENDIX C UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY | |||
COMMISSION | |||
In the flatter of )DUOUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Docket No. 50-334 (Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1) )ORDER MODIFYING | |||
LICENSE EFFECTIVE | |||
IMMEDIATELY | |||
I The Duquesne Light Company (the "licensee") | |||
is the holder of Operating | |||
License DPR-66 (the "license") | |||
which authorizes | |||
operation | |||
of the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 2652 megawatts | |||
thermal (rated power). The license was issued on January 30, 1976. The facility consists of a pressurized | |||
light water moderated | |||
and cooled reactor (PWR), located at the licensee's | |||
site in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, on the southern shore of the Ohio River.It On November 27, 1979, from about 6:30 AM to 1:20 PM while the reactor was operating | |||
at about 30% of rated power, Emergency | |||
Diesel Generator (EDG) 1 was out of service for routine maintenance. | |||
This EDG supplies emergency | |||
power to suction valve, MOV-CH-115B, in the line from the refueling | |||
water storage tank (RWST) to the High Pressure Safety Injection | |||
System (HPSIS) pumps. In addition to the EDG being out of service, resulting | |||
in loss of one Emergency | |||
Core Cooling System (ECCS) flow path, as described | |||
above, the redundant | |||
suction valve, MOV-CH-115D, was removed from service for maintenance | |||
which resulted in loss of the redundant | |||
ECCS flow path from the RWST from 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.During this time the facility was operated in noncompliance | |||
with the Limiting Condition | |||
for Operation | |||
specified | |||
in Technical | |||
Specification | |||
3.5.2.c. This condition | |||
resulted from inadequate | |||
control of maintenance | |||
activities | |||
and its | |||
Appendix C-2 -occurrence | |||
suggests that the licensee has not adopted appropriate | |||
controls to assure that maintenance | |||
activities | |||
do not defeat required safety features.This in turn undermines | |||
the basis for determining | |||
that there is reasonable | |||
assurance | |||
that redundant | |||
safety features will function under design basis conditions. | |||
In view of the significance | |||
to safety of adequate controls to assure that maintenance | |||
activities | |||
do not defeat required safety features, I have deter-mined that the public health, safety, or interest requires, effective | |||
immediately, modification | |||
of License No. DPR-66 as stated in Part III of this Order.III Accordingly, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's | |||
regulations | |||
in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50, License DPR-66 is modified as follows: (1) Administrative | |||
Procedures | |||
shall be adopted and implemented | |||
to require redundant | |||
independent | |||
verification | |||
of the operability | |||
of the remaining engineered | |||
safety features whenever any safety system, or subpart thereof, is intentionally | |||
removed from service.(2) A detailed review of existing procedures | |||
and controls shall be performed to assure that limiting conditions | |||
for operation | |||
are not defeated by maintenance | |||
or other activities. | |||
(3) A report of the administrative | |||
procedures | |||
required by paragraph | |||
(1) above and the detailed review required by paragraph | |||
(2) above shall be submitted by January 11, 1980, to the Director of NRC's Region I office. | |||
Appendix C-3 -(4) The licensee shall meet with the Director, Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement, on or before January 25, 1980, in a meeting open to the public in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley site to describe how the above requirements | |||
will be implemented. | |||
The Director, Region I, will inform the licensee at least one week in advance of the specific time and location of the meeting.IV The licensee, or any other person who has an interest affected by this Order, may, within twenty-five | |||
days of the date of this Order, request a hearing. A request for a hearing shall be addressed | |||
to the Director, Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement, U.S.N.R.C., Washington, D.C. 20555. If a hearing is requested by the licensee or an interested | |||
person, the Commission | |||
will issue an Order designating | |||
the time and place of hearing. Such a request for hearing SHALL NOT STAY THE IMMEDIATE | |||
EFFECTIVENESS | |||
OF THIS ORDER.Resumption | |||
of operation | |||
on terms consistent | |||
with this Order is not stayed by the pendency of any proceeding | |||
on this Order. In the event that a need for further enforcement | |||
action becomes apparent, either in the course of any proceeding | |||
on this Order or at any other time, the Director will take appro-priate action.V In the event the licensee or any other interested | |||
person requests a hearing as provided above and a hearing is held, the issues to be considered | |||
at such a hearing shall be: | |||
Appendix C -4 -(1) whether the facts set forth in Part II of this Order are correct;and, (2) whether this Order should be sustained. | |||
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY | |||
COW2IISSION | |||
Victor Stello, Jr.Director Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement | |||
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 5th day of December, 1979.}} | |||
{{Information notice-Nav}} | {{Information notice-Nav}} |
Revision as of 13:22, 31 August 2018
ML031180205 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | 05000000 |
Issue date: | 12/31/1979 |
From: | NRC/OI |
To: | |
References | |
IN-79-035, NUDOCS 7910250510 | |
Download: ML031180205 (10) | |
UNITED STATES SSINS No.: 6870 NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Accessions
Mo.: OFFICE OF INSPECTION
AND ENFORCEMENT
7910250510
WASHINGTON, -D.C. 20555 December 31, 1979 IE Information
Notice No. 79-35 CONTROL OF MAINTENANCE
AND ESSENTIAL
EnUIPMENT Description
of Circumstances:
Enclosed is a copy of a recent enforcement
action against Duquesne Light Company.A coDy of this action is being forwarded
to all utilities
with a power reactor operating
license or a construction
permit. This is being done to apprise you of a serious condition
which revealed an apparent weakness in facility control of maintenance
and essential
equipment.
You should review your existinq procedures
and control for independent
verification
of operability
of redundant
counterpart
equipment
when an essential
component, subsystem, or system is determined
Operability
is defined as follows: A system, subsystem, train, component
or device shall be OPERABLE or have OPERABILITY
when it is capable of performing
its specified
functionts).
Implicit in this definition
shall be the assumption
that all necessary attendant
instrumentation, controls, normal and emergency
electrical
power sources, coolinq or seal water, lubrication
or other auxiliary
equipment that are required for the system, subsystem, train, component
or device to perform its function(s)
are also capable of performing
their related support function(s).
If you have any Questions
reqardina
this matter, please contact the Director of the NRC Regional Office in which your facilities
are located. No written response to this IE Information
Notice is required.Enclosures:
1. Letter to Duguesne Light Company from V. Stello, Jr., dtd. 12/5/79 2. Recently Issued IE Information
Notices
IE Information
Notice No. 79-35 December ,31 1979 Enclosure RECENTLY ISSUED IE INFORMATION
NOTICES Information
Notice No.Subject Date Issued Issued To 79-34 79-33 79-32 79-31 79-30 79-29 79-28 Inadequate
Desiqn of Safety-Related
Heat Exchangers
Improper Closure of Primary Containment
Access Hatches Separation
of Electrical
Cables for HPCI and ADS Use of Incorrect
Amplified Response Spectra (ARS)Reportinq
of Defects and Noncompliance, 10 CFR Part 21.Loss of NonSafety-Related
Reactor Coolant System Instrumentation
During Operation Overloading
of Structural
Elements Due to Pipe Support Loads Steam Generator
Tube Ruptures At Two PWR Facilities
Attempted
Damane To New Fuel Assemblies
Breach of Containment
Integrity Reactor Trips At Turkey Point Units 3 And 4 12/6/79 All power reactor facilities
holding OLs and CPs and vendors inspected
by LCVIP 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities
holding OLs or CPs 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities
with an OL or CP 11/16/79 All power reactor facilities
holdinq OLs and CPs 11/9/79 All Fuel Facilities, research reactors, and power reactors with an OL or CP 12/27/79 All holders of power reactor OLs and CPs 12/21/79 All power reactor facilities
holdinc OLs and CPs 12/21/79 All power reactor facilities
holding OLs and CPs 12/13/79 All holders of power reactor OLs and CPs 79-27 79-12A 79-26 79-25 11/5/79 10/1/79 All power reactor facilities
holdina OLs and CPs All power facilities
with an nL or a CP
Docket No. 50-334 December 5, 1979 Duquesne Light Company ATTN: Mr. Stanley G. Schaeffer President 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
15219 Gentlemen:
On November 27, 1979, the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, was operated for about two (2) hours in a condition
which exceeded the Limiting Conditions
for Operation.
This matter was brought to the attention
of our inspector
at your facility in a timely fashion, and your subsequent
action to correct the condition
was expeditious.
Nevertheless, this condition
rendered a part of the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) unavailable
for automatic
start and injection
of coolant into the reactor coolant system (RCS) if the need had occurred concur-rent with the loss of offsite power (the design basis). This unavailability
of ECCS constitutes
a serious matter which reveals an apparent weakness in your control of maintenance
and essential
equipment.
Therefore, we propose to impose a civil penalty for the item of noncompliance
set forth in Appendix A to this letter in the amount of $5,000. Appendix B is a Notice of Proposed Imposition
of Civil Penalties.
You are required to respond to this letter and in preparing
your response, you should follow the instructions
in Appendices
A and B.In addition to the civil penalty, we are issuing the enclosed Order (Appendix
C)effective
Immediately.
This Order requires that your administrative
control of licensed activities
involving
operating
and maintenance
of safety equipment verifies availability
of all required equipment
when a counterpart
is removed from an operable status. This Order further requires that you formally review and report your actions to prevent recurrence:
It also requires that you meet publicly on January 25, 1980, with the Director, Office of Inspection
and Enforcement, at a location near the Beaver Valley Power Station, to discuss your evaluation
of this conditon and your corrective
actions to prevent recurrence.
We will inform you of the location and time of the meeting.
Duquesne Light Company-2 -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 enclosures
will be placed in the Commission's
Public Document Room.Sincerely, Victor Stello, Jr.Director Office of Inspection
and Enforcement
Enclosure:
1. Appendix A, Notice of Violation 2. Appendix B, Notice of Proposed Imposition
of Civil Penalties 3. Appendix C, Order Modifying
License cc: C. N. Dunn, Vice President, Operations
Division F. Bissert, Technical
Assistant
Nuclear R. WIashabaugh, QA Manager J. Werling, Station Superintendent
G. Moore, General Superintendent, J. J. Carey, Nuclear Technical
Assistant R. Martin, Nuclear Engineer
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 Pittsburqh, Pennsylvania
15219 License No. DPR 66 This refers to the inspection
conducted
by the NRC Resident Inspector
at the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, of activities
authorized
by NRC License No. DPR 66.During the inspection
conducted
on November 27, 1979, the following
item of noncompliance
was identified.
Technical
Specification
3.5.2 states that with the plant in Mode 1 (Power Operation), two separate and independent
ECCS subsystems
shall be operable, and further states in section 3.5.2.c that each subsystem
shall include an operable flow path caoable of taking suction from the refueling
water storage tank upon initiation
of a safety injection
signal.Technical
Specification
1.6 defines "operable" to include the assumption
that all necessary
attendant
instrumentation, controls, electric power, cooling or seal water, lubrication
or other auxiliary
equipment
that are required for the system, subsystem, train, component
or device to perform its function(s)
are also capable of performing
their related safety function(s).
Contrary to the above, on November 27, 1979, from approximately
8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., maintenance
activities
rendered both ECCS subsystems
in that a) refueling
water storage tank isolation
valve MOV-CH-115D
was closed and incapable
of automatic
opening in response to a safety injection
signal, and b) refueling
water storage tank isolation
valve MOV-CH-115B, in the redundant subsystem, was closed, had no emergency
power available, and thus was incapable of automatic
opening In response to a safety injection
signal if there had been a condition
of loss of offsite power.This violation
had the potential
for causing or contributing
to an occurrence
related to health and safety (Civil Penalty $5,000).
APPENDIX B NOTICE OF PROPOSED IMPOSITION
OF CIVIL PENALTIES Duquesne Light Company nocket No. 50-334 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
15219 License No. DPR-66 This office has considered
the enforcement
options available
to the MRC including
administrative
actions in the form of written notices of violation, civil monetary penalties, and orders pertaining
to the modification, suspension
or revocation
of a license. Based on these considerations, we propose to impose civil penalties
pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (42 USC 2282), and to 10 CFR 2.205 in the cumulative
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) for the specific items of noncompliance
set forth in Appendix A to the cover letter. In proposing
to impose civil penal-ties pursuant to this section of the Act and in fixing the proposed amount of the penalties, the factors identified
in the Statements
of Consideration
published
in the Federal Register with the rule-making
action which adopted 10 CFR 2.205 (36 FR 16894) August 26, 1971, and the "Criteria
for Determining
Enforcement
Action," which was sent to NRC licensees
on December 31, 1974, have been taken into account.Duquesne Light Company may, within twenty (20) days of the receipt of this notice pay the civil penalties
in the cumulative
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) or may protest the imposition
of the civil penalties
in whole or in part by a written answer. Should Duquesne Light Company fail to answer within the time specified, this office will issue an order imposing the civil penalties
in the amount proposed above. Should Duquesne Light Company elect to file an answer protesting
the civil penalties, such an answer may (a) deny the items of noncompliance
listed in the Notice of Violation
in whole or in part, (b) demonstrate
extenuating
circumstances, (c) show error in the Notice of Violation, (d) show other reasons why the penalties
should not be imposed.In addition, to protesting
the civil penalties
in whole or in part, such answer may request remission
or mitigation
of the penalties.
Any written answer in accordance
with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately
from the statement
or explanation
in reply pursuant to 2.201, but may incorporate
by specific reference (e.g., giving page and paragraph
numbers)to avoid repetition.
Duquesne Light Company's
attention
is directed to the other provisions
of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding, in particular, failure. to answer and ensuing orders;answer, consideration
by this office, and ensuing orders; requests for hearings, hearings and ensuing orders; compromise, and collection.
Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which has been subsequently
determined
in accordance
with the applicable
provisions
of 10 CFR 2.205, the 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 234.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC 2282).
APPENDIX C UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
In the flatter of )DUOUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Docket No. 50-334 (Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1) )ORDER MODIFYING
LICENSE EFFECTIVE
IMMEDIATELY
I The Duquesne Light Company (the "licensee")
is the holder of Operating
License DPR-66 (the "license")
which authorizes
operation
of the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 2652 megawatts
thermal (rated power). The license was issued on January 30, 1976. The facility consists of a pressurized
light water moderated
and cooled reactor (PWR), located at the licensee's
site in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, on the southern shore of the Ohio River.It On November 27, 1979, from about 6:30 AM to 1:20 PM while the reactor was operating
at about 30% of rated power, Emergency
Diesel Generator (EDG) 1 was out of service for routine maintenance.
This EDG supplies emergency
power to suction valve, MOV-CH-115B, in the line from the refueling
water storage tank (RWST) to the High Pressure Safety Injection
System (HPSIS) pumps. In addition to the EDG being out of service, resulting
in loss of one Emergency
Core Cooling System (ECCS) flow path, as described
above, the redundant
suction valve, MOV-CH-115D, was removed from service for maintenance
which resulted in loss of the redundant
ECCS flow path from the RWST from 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.During this time the facility was operated in noncompliance
with the Limiting Condition
for Operation
specified
in Technical
Specification
3.5.2.c. This condition
resulted from inadequate
control of maintenance
activities
and its
Appendix C-2 -occurrence
suggests that the licensee has not adopted appropriate
controls to assure that maintenance
activities
do not defeat required safety features.This in turn undermines
the basis for determining
that there is reasonable
assurance
that redundant
safety features will function under design basis conditions.
In view of the significance
to safety of adequate controls to assure that maintenance
activities
do not defeat required safety features, I have deter-mined that the public health, safety, or interest requires, effective
immediately, modification
of License No. DPR-66 as stated in Part III of this Order.III Accordingly, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's
regulations
in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50, License DPR-66 is modified as follows: (1) Administrative
Procedures
shall be adopted and implemented
to require redundant
independent
verification
of the operability
of the remaining engineered
safety features whenever any safety system, or subpart thereof, is intentionally
removed from service.(2) A detailed review of existing procedures
and controls shall be performed to assure that limiting conditions
for operation
are not defeated by maintenance
or other activities.
(3) A report of the administrative
procedures
required by paragraph
(1) above and the detailed review required by paragraph
(2) above shall be submitted by January 11, 1980, to the Director of NRC's Region I office.
Appendix C-3 -(4) The licensee shall meet with the Director, Office of Inspection
and Enforcement, on or before January 25, 1980, in a meeting open to the public in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley site to describe how the above requirements
will be implemented.
The Director, Region I, will inform the licensee at least one week in advance of the specific time and location of the meeting.IV The licensee, or any other person who has an interest affected by this Order, may, within twenty-five
days of the date of this Order, request a hearing. A request for a hearing shall be addressed
to the Director, Office of Inspection
and Enforcement, U.S.N.R.C., Washington, D.C. 20555. If a hearing is requested by the licensee or an interested
person, the Commission
will issue an Order designating
the time and place of hearing. Such a request for hearing SHALL NOT STAY THE IMMEDIATE
EFFECTIVENESS
OF THIS ORDER.Resumption
of operation
on terms consistent
with this Order is not stayed by the pendency of any proceeding
on this Order. In the event that a need for further enforcement
action becomes apparent, either in the course of any proceeding
on this Order or at any other time, the Director will take appro-priate action.V In the event the licensee or any other interested
person requests a hearing as provided above and a hearing is held, the issues to be considered
at such a hearing shall be:
Appendix C -4 -(1) whether the facts set forth in Part II of this Order are correct;and, (2) whether this Order should be sustained.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COW2IISSION
Victor Stello, Jr.Director Office of Inspection
and Enforcement
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 5th day of December, 1979.