ML060390187: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 01/23/2006
| issue date = 01/23/2006
| title = EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071, and EA-05-072, Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation, FENOC
| title = EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071, and EA-05-072, Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation, FENOC
| author name = Leidich G R
| author name = Leidich G
| author affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| author affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| addressee name = Johnson M R
| addressee name = Johnson M
| addressee affiliation = NRC/OE
| addressee affiliation = NRC/OE
| docket = 05000346
| docket = 05000346
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:FENOC"t 76 South Main Street FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Akron, (hio 44308 Gary R. Leidich 330-384-5770 President and Chief Nuclear Officer Fax: 330.384-5669 Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 January 23, 2006 Mr. Michael R. Johnson Director, Office of Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738
{{#Wiki_filter:FENOC           "t                                                                                     76 South Main Street FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company                                                                     Akron, (hio 44308 Gary R.Leidich                                                                                               330-384-5770 President and Chief Nuclear Officer                                                                     Fax: 330.384-5669 Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 January 23, 2006 Mr. Michael R. Johnson Director, Office of Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation:
Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072
EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072  


==Dear Mr. Johnson:==
==Dear Mr. Johnson:==
On April 21, 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission  
 
("NRC") issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company ("FENOC")
On April 21, 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company ("FENOC") a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties - $5,450,000 ("NOV") for apparent violations stemming from the reactor pressure vessel ("RPV") head degradation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station ("Davis-Besse").
a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties  
On September 14, 2005, FENOC responded, via FENOC letter Serial Number 3190. On January 19, 2006, FENOC and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement") which caused the Company to reassess and amend its earlier reply to Violation I.E. as set forth in this supplemental reply in Enclosure 1. As previously noted by the NRC, FENOC has already taken corrective action and paid the civil penalty associated with this violation.
-$5,450,000  
I am available to answer any questions you may have regarding FENOC's response. Should you wish to contact me, I can be reached at (330) 384-5770.
("NOV") for apparent violations stemming from the reactor pressure vessel ("RPV") head degradation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station ("Davis-Besse").
The statements contained in this submittal, including its associated enclosures are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I am authorized by the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company to make this submittal. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
On September 14, 2005, FENOC responded, via FENOC letter Serial Number 3190. On January 19, 2006, FENOC and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement")
Executed on:               7 Z51 ZvO6 By:         / de h, Gary R. &dich, President & Chief Nuclear Officer
which caused the Company to reassess and amend its earlier reply to Violation I.E. as set forth in this supplemental reply in Enclosure  
 
: 1. As previously noted by the NRC, FENOC has already taken corrective action and paid the civil penalty associated with this violation.
Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 Page 2 of 2 : FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company's Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties : Commitment List cc:     Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Regional Administrator, NRC Region III Enforcement Officer, NRC Region I11 NRC Senior Resident Inspector NRC/NRR Project Manager USNRC Document Control Desk Utility Radiological Safety Board
I am available to answer any questions you may have regarding FENOC's response.
 
Should you wish to contact me, I can be reached at (330) 384-5770.The statements contained in this submittal, including its associated enclosures are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I am authorized by the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company to make this submittal.
Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR 2.201 - $5,450,000 EA-03-025; EA-05-C66; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072 (4 pages to follow)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.Executed on: 7 Z51 ZvO6 By: / de h, Gary R. &dich, President  
 
& Chief Nuclear Officer Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 1: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company's Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties Enclosure 2: Commitment List cc: Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Regional Administrator, NRC Region III Enforcement Officer, NRC Region I11 NRC Senior Resident Inspector NRC/NRR Project Manager USNRC Document Control Desk Utility Radiological Safety Board Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 Enclosure 1 FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR 2.201 -$5,450,000 EA-03-025; EA-05-C66; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072 (4 pages to follow)
FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S ("FENOC") SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR § 2.201 - $5,450,000: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-68: EA-05-069; EA- 5-070; EA-05-071; AND EA-05-072 This supplements FENOC's September 14, 2005, response by amending FENOC's response to apparent Violation I.E. FENOC's earlier response remains unchanged in all other respects.
FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S  
I.     VIOLATIONS ASSESSED A CIV][L PENALTY Violation I.E.
("FENOC")
A.     10 CFR 50.9 requires that information provided to the Commission by a licensee or information required by statute or by the Commission's regulations, orders, or license conditions to be maintained by the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR § 2.201 -$5,450,000:
NRC Bulletin 2001-01, "Circumferential Cracking of Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles," required all holders of operating licenses for pressurized water nuclear power reactors to provide information related to the structural integrity of the reactor vessel head penetration (VHP) nozzles for their respective facilities, including the extent of VIIP nozzle leakage and cracking that has been found to date, the inspections and repairs that have been undertaken to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, and the basis for concluding that their plans for future Inspections will ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-68:
Contrary to the above, the licensee., a holder of an operating license for a pressurized water nuclear power reactor, the Davis-Besse Station, provided the Commission responses to Bulletin 2,001-01 which included materially inaccurate and incomplete information as follows:
EA-05-069; EA- 5-070; EA-05-071; AND EA-05-072 This supplements FENOC's September 14, 2005, response by amending FENOC's response to apparent Violation I.E. FENOC's earlier response remains unchanged in all other respects.I. VIOLATIONS ASSESSED A CIV][L PENALTY Violation I.E.A. 10 CFR 50.9 requires that information provided to the Commission by a licensee or information required by statute or by the Commission's regulations, orders, or license conditions to be maintained by the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.NRC Bulletin 2001-01, "Circumferential Cracking of Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles," required all holders of operating licenses for pressurized water nuclear power reactors to provide information related to the structural integrity of the reactor vessel head penetration (VHP) nozzles for their respective facilities, including the extent of VIIP nozzle leakage and cracking that has been found to date, the inspections and repairs that have been undertaken to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, and the basis for concluding that their plans for future Inspections will ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
: 1.       In a September 4, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2731, the licensee made the following four materially inaccurate and incomplete statements:
Contrary to the above, the licensee., a holder of an operating license for a pressurized water nuclear power reactor, the Davis-Besse Station, provided the Commission responses to Bulletin 2,001-01 which included materially inaccurate and incomplete information as follows: 1. In a September 4, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2731, the licensee made the following four materially inaccurate and incomplete statements: (a) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.c, on page 2 of 19, stated: "the minimum gap being at the dome center of the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head where it is approximately 2 inches, and does not impede a qualified visual inspection." The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that, the statement contradicted statements in the licensee's documents identified as PCAQR 94-0295 and 96-0551, which clearly stated that inspection capability at the top of the reactor vessel head was limited.
(a)   The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.c, on page 2 of 19, stated:
The limitation was stated to be caused by the restricted access to the area through the service structure "weep holes", the curvature of the reactor pressure vessel head, and by the limited space to manipulate a camera due to the insulation that creates the two inch gap.(b) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which requested inclusion of a description of any limitations (insulation or other impediments) to accessibility of the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head for visual examinations, did not include a description of any limitations.
                      "the minimum gap being at the dome center of the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head where it is approximately 2 inches, and does not impede a qualified visual inspection."
The licensee's response was materially incomplete in that the response did not mention that accessibility to the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head was impeded, during the Eleventh (1998) and the Twelfth (2000) Refueling Outages, by the presence of significant accumulations of boric acid deposits.(c) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which also requested a discussion of the findings of reactor pressure vessel head inspections, stated that for the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000), the inspection of the reactor pressure vessel head/nozzles indicated some accumulation of boric acid deposits.The licensee's response was materially incomplete and inaccurate in that it mischaracterized the accumulation of boric acid on the reactor pressure vessel head and did not mention the evidence of corrosion that was evidenced by the pictures and the video examination of reactor pressure vessel head conditions documented at the beginning and ending of the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000).(d) The licensee's response to the Bulletin, on Page 3, stated: "The boric acid deposits were located beneath the leaking flanges with clear evidence of downward flow. No visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected." The licensee's response was materially inaccurate in that the boric acid deposits were not all located under leaking flanges and the licensee lacked clear evidence of the absence of downward flow for all nozzles. Specifically, the presence of boric acid deposits was not limited only to the areas beneath the flanges, as implied by that statement.
The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that, the statement contradicted statements in the licensee's documents identified as PCAQR 94-0295 and 96-0551, which clearly stated that inspection capability at the top of the reactor vessel head was limited.
The build-up of boric acid deposits was so significant that the licensee could not inspect all of the nozzles. As a result, the licensee also did not have a basis for stating that no visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected.  
 
: 2. In an October 17, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Supplemental Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2735, the licensee stated: "In May 1996, during a refueling outage, the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head was inspected.
The limitation was stated to be caused by the restricted access to the area through the service structure "weep holes", the curvature of the reactor pressure vessel head, and by the limited space to manipulate a camera due to the insulation that creates the two inch gap.
No leakage was identified, and these results have been recently verified by a re-review of the video tapes obtained from that inspection.
(b) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which requested inclusion of a description of any limitations (insulation or other impediments) to accessibility of the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head for visual examinations, did not include a description of any limitations.
The RPV head was mechanically cleaned at the end of the outage.Subsequent inspections of the RPV head in the next two refueling outages (1998 and 2000), also did not identify any leakage in the CRDM [control rod drive mechanism]
The licensee's response was materially incomplete in that the response did not mention that accessibility to the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head was impeded, during the Eleventh (1998) and the Twelfth (2000) Refueling Outages, by the presence of significant accumulations of boric acid deposits.
nozzle-to.-head areas that could be inspected.
(c)   The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which also requested a discussion of the findings of reactor pressure vessel head inspections, stated that for the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000), the inspection of the reactor pressure vessel head/nozzles indicated some accumulation of boric acid deposits.
Video tapes taken during these inspections have also been re-reviewed." The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that: (1) each reactor pressure vessel head control rod drive penetration was not inspected in May 1996, as documented in PCAQR 96-0551, and; (2) the reactor pressure vessel head, including the area around each control rod drive penetration, was not completely cleaned, as noted in PCAQR 98-0649, which was prepared at the start of the Eleventh Refueling Outage (1998), which stated that there were old boric acid deposits on the head.This is a Severity Level I violation (Supplement VII).Civil Penalty -$120,000 (EA-05-072)
The licensee's response was materially incomplete and inaccurate in that it mischaracterized the accumulation of boric acid on the reactor pressure vessel head and did not mention the evidence of corrosion that was evidenced by the pictures and the video examination of reactor pressure vessel head conditions documented at the beginning and ending of the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000).
FENOC Supplemental Replv to Violation I.E.1. Admission or Denial of the Alleged Violation:
(d) The licensee's response to the Bulletin, on Page 3, stated: "The boric acid deposits were located beneath the leaking flanges with clear evidence of downward flow. No visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected."
The licensee's response was materially inaccurate in that the boric acid deposits were not all located under leaking flanges and the licensee lacked clear evidence of the absence of downward flow for all nozzles. Specifically, the presence of boric acid deposits was not limited only to the areas beneath the flanges, as implied by that statement. The build-up of boric acid deposits was so significant that the licensee could not inspect all of the nozzles. As a result, the licensee also did not have a basis for stating that no visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected.
: 2.     In an October 17, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Supplemental Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2735, the licensee stated: "In May 1996, during a refueling outage, the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head was inspected. No leakage was identified, and these results have been recently verified by a re-review of the video tapes obtained from that inspection. The RPV head was mechanically cleaned at the end of the outage.
Subsequent inspections of the RPV head in the next two refueling outages (1998 and 2000), also did not identify any leakage in the CRDM [control rod drive mechanism] nozzle-to.-head areas that could be inspected. Video tapes taken during these inspections have also been re-reviewed."
The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that: (1) each reactor pressure vessel head control rod drive penetration was not inspected in May 1996, as documented in PCAQR 96-0551, and; (2) the reactor pressure vessel head, including the area around each control rod drive penetration, was not completely cleaned, as noted in PCAQR 98-0649, which was prepared at the start of the Eleventh Refueling Outage (1998), which stated that there were old boric acid deposits on the head.
This is a Severity Level I violation (Supplement VII).
Civil Penalty - $120,000 (EA-05-072)
FENOC Supplemental Replv to Violation I.E.
: 1.     Admission or Denial of the Alleged Violation:
FENOC admits the alleged violation.
FENOC admits the alleged violation.
: 2. Reason(s) for the Alleged Violation:
: 2. Reason(s) for the Alleged Violation:
Refer to the reasons cited in FENOC letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, Enclosure 1 reply to Violations I.B and II.C. Specifically, refer to the FENOC response to Violation II.C, which cites FENOC's Completeness and Accuracy Root Cause Report (Condition Report CR 2002-04914).
Refer to the reasons cited in FENOC letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, Enclosure 1 reply to Violations I.B and II.C. Specifically, refer to the FENOC response to Violation II.C, which cites FENOC's Completeness and Accuracy Root Cause Report (Condition Report CR 2002-04914). These reasons, as related to the above described Violation I.E, are further described in the "Apparent Violation of 10CFR50.9, Completeness and Accuracy Of Information," Root Cause Report (CR 2002-04914, dated April 4, 2003).
These reasons, as related to the above described Violation I.E, are further described in the "Apparent Violation of 10CFR50.9, Completeness and Accuracy Of Information," Root Cause Report (CR 2002-04914, dated April 4, 2003).In its original reply of September 14, 2005, FENOC denied this violation because it believed that, although in hindsight letters Serial Number 2731 and Serial Number 2735 could have been more clear, when read in context and when further considered with the totality of the information provided to the NRC over the fall of 2001, FENOC's collective response to Bulletin 2001-01 was complete and accurate in all material respects.
In its original reply of September 14, 2005, FENOC denied this violation because it believed that, although in hindsight letters Serial Number 2731 and Serial Number 2735 could have been more clear, when read in context and when further considered with the totality of the information provided to the NRC over the fall of 2001, FENOC's collective response to Bulletin 2001-01 was complete and accurate in all material respects.
FENOC has reassessed its earlier position, as set forth in the Statement of Facts attached to the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, executed on January 19, 2006, and consequently, FENOC herein amends its earlier response and admits the alleged violation.
FENOC has reassessed its earlier position, as set forth in the Statement of Facts attached to the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, executed on January 19, 2006, and consequently, FENOC herein amends its earlier response and admits the alleged violation.
: 3. Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved: The Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved," are unchanged from FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, response.
: 3. Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved:
FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190 Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and Results Achieved," referred to Enclosure 1, reply to Violation I.B.4. Corrective Steps To Avoid Further Violations:
The Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved,"
See item 3, above.5. Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved: FENOC is currently in full compliance.
are unchanged from FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, response. FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190 Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and Results Achieved," referred to Enclosure 1, reply to Violation I.B.
Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 Enclosure 2 COMMITMENT LIST The following list identifies those actions committed to by the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in this document.
: 4. Corrective Steps To Avoid Further Violations:
Any other actions discussed in the submittal represent intended or planned actions by Davis-Besse.
See item 3, above.
They are described only as information and are not regulatory commitments.
: 5. Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved:
Please notify the Manager, Regulatory Compliance, at (419) 321-8585 at Davis-Besse of questions regarding any associated regulatory commitments.
FENOC is currently in full compliance.
COMMITMENTS DUE DATE None N/A NRC OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE ROUTING AND APPROVAL FORM CCN #ED 7159-9 (1) Letter No.: (2) Letter  
Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 COMMITMENT LIST The following list identifies those actions committed to by the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in this document. Any other actions discussed in the submittal represent intended or planned actions by Davis-Besse. They are described only as information and are not regulatory commitments. Please notify the Manager, Regulatory Compliance, at (419) 321-8585 at Davis-Besse of questions regarding any associated regulatory commitments.
COMMITMENTS                                             DUE DATE None                                                   N/A
 
NRC OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE ROUTING AND APPROVAL FORM                                                                     CCN #
ED 7159-9 (1) Letter No.:     (2) Letter  


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Supplemental Reply to Notice of Violation:
Supplemental Reply to Notice of Violation: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA     Serial 3225                             069; EA-05-070; EA-05-C71; EA-05-072 (3) Prepared By: J. Sturdavant                   D. Jenkins                         D. Ferraro Phone Ext:     x8199                     *825-5037                         Morgan & Lewis (4) Documents         Log 6292                   Serial 3190 Associated With Letter:
EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-Serial 3225 069; EA-05-070; EA-05-C71; EA-05-072 (3) Prepared By: J. Sturdavant D. Jenkins D. Ferraro Phone Ext: x8199 *825-5037 Morgan & Lewis (4) Documents Log 6292 Serial 3190 Associated With Letter: (5) Date Response (6) Verification (7) Posting Reqjired (8) Commitments Contained in (9) Notary Required (or Due to the NRC: Package Developed?
(5) Date Response (6) Verification                 (7) Posting Reqjired       (8) Commitments Contained in                 (9) Notary Required (or Due to the NRC:           Package Developed? By 10 CFR 19.11?                   Letter? El Yes 0D No If yes, see             affirmation contained in E N/A 1/23/06 0 Yes El No                           E Yes Z No                 commitment list included with letter.         letter)? El Yes Z No (Target)
By 10 CFR 19.11? Letter? El Yes 0D No If yes, see affirmation contained in E N/A 1/23/06 0 Yes El No E Yes Z No commitment list included with letter. letter)? El Yes Z No (Target)(10) Technical Review* (Print Name & Date Comments Section) Provided to Date No Attached Sig lature Reviewer Reviewed Comments on ED 6864 RA Cog J. Sturdavant  
(10) Technical Review* (Print Name &                                                             Date                                         Comments Section)                                                                                     Provided to           Date           No         Attached Sig lature                   Reviewer         Reviewed     Comments       on ED 6864 RA Cog J. Sturdavant                                                                                                   /hiL 1/tt66 A/
/hi L 1/tt66 A/Vrifie Pper Reviewer Cognizant RA Supervision  
Vrifie Pper Reviewer Cognizant RA Supervision /
/J. Sturdavant J i11/ZZ/O2 c L b Legal -Morgan & Lewis J. Gutierrez 0 >:., 1__ ___°Director -Fleet Regulatory Affairs , G. Halnon ____Eli El______ _E l El1-_ l1 El_ _El El1 Director -Performance Improvement R. Schrauder  
J. Sturdavant J                                                                                               i11/ZZ/O2 cLb Legal - Morgan & Lewis J. Gutierrez                                                         1__  0                   >:.,                                             ___° Director - Fleet Regulatory Affairs                                                         ,
' El Manager -Regulatory Affairs C. Price El Vice President, Nuclear M. Bezilla E President, FENOC 1,-A.G. Leidich IQxU 7 J/Z76 if E If applicable:
G. Halnon                                                                                                     ____Eli             El
On-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date_ Off-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date (11) Additional Information  
______                                                                  _E                         l               El1
[For Regulatory Affairs Use Only-Review comments must be documented on a Document Review Form (ED 6864)]Validation Package available from Regulatory Compliance  
                                                                                              -   _                                   l1             El
-J. Sturclavant x8199 In accordance with NG-RA-00804, "NRC Communications,'
_  _El                                       El1 Director - Performance Improvement R. Schrauder                                                                                                                           '           El Manager - Regulatory Affairs C. Price                                                                                                                                             El Vice President, Nuclear M.Bezilla                                                                                                                                           E President, FENOC                                           1,-A.
NOTE 6.3.10 in the interest of expediency the departmenth aa o appr val of this submittal will be conducted in parallel.
G. Leidich                                                                                             7 IQxU       J/Z76             if               E If applicable: On-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date_                       Off-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date (11) Additional Information [For Regulatory Affairs Use Only-Review comments must be documented on a Document Review Form (ED 6864)]
The cognizant Regulatory Compliance Supervisor has concurred with this parallel rou in i /OC)--- Parallel Routinc --Reviewed by Nuclear Oversight in accordance with NG-RA-00804 Step 6.3.19 to provide additional assurance of completeness and accuracy.Name p ( .Date JL"X3/a(* Signatures indicate that the submittal was reviewed for accuracy and completeness and represents the facts to the best of the reviewer's knowledge and that no significant information has been excluded from the submittal.
Validation Package available from Regulatory Compliance - J. Sturclavant x8199 In accordance with NG-RA-00804, "NRC Communications,' NOTE 6.3.10 in the interest of expediency the departmenth               aao appr val of this submittal will be conducted in parallel. The cognizant Regulatory Compliance Supervisor has concurred with this parallel rou in               i       /OC)
'' Additional signatures may not be required from the Section/Department If responses are provided In writing and are signed by the Section/Department managers for providing input into the submittal.
                                                                --- Parallel Routinc --
These documents should accompany the submittal when routing for final approvals.}}
Reviewed by Nuclear Oversight in accordance with NG-RA-00804 Step 6.3.19 to provide additional assurance of completeness and accuracy.
Name       p     (       . Date JL"X3/a(
* Signatures indicate that the submittal was reviewed for accuracy and completeness and represents the facts to the best of the reviewer's knowledge and that no significant information has been excluded from the submittal.
'' Additional signatures may not be required from the Section/Department If responses are provided In writing and are signed by the Section/Department managers for providing input into the submittal. These documents should accompany the submittal when routing for final approvals.}}

Latest revision as of 10:14, 14 March 2020

EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071, and EA-05-072, Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation, FENOC
ML060390187
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse Cleveland Electric icon.png
Issue date: 01/23/2006
From: Leidich G
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
To: Mary Johnson
NRC/OE
References
3225, EA-03-025, EA-05-066, EA-05-067, EA-05-068, EA-05-069, EA-05-070, EA-05-071, EA-05-072
Download: ML060390187 (9)
v • d • e


Text

FENOC "t 76 South Main Street FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Akron, (hio 44308 Gary R.Leidich 330-384-5770 President and Chief Nuclear Officer Fax: 330.384-5669 Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 January 23, 2006 Mr. Michael R. Johnson Director, Office of Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738

Subject:

Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072

Dear Mr. Johnson:

On April 21, 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company ("FENOC") a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties - $5,450,000 ("NOV") for apparent violations stemming from the reactor pressure vessel ("RPV") head degradation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station ("Davis-Besse").

On September 14, 2005, FENOC responded, via FENOC letter Serial Number 3190. On January 19, 2006, FENOC and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement") which caused the Company to reassess and amend its earlier reply to Violation I.E. as set forth in this supplemental reply in Enclosure 1. As previously noted by the NRC, FENOC has already taken corrective action and paid the civil penalty associated with this violation.

I am available to answer any questions you may have regarding FENOC's response. Should you wish to contact me, I can be reached at (330) 384-5770.

The statements contained in this submittal, including its associated enclosures are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I am authorized by the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company to make this submittal. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on: 7 Z51 ZvO6 By: / de h, Gary R. &dich, President & Chief Nuclear Officer

Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 Page 2 of 2 : FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company's Supplemental Reply to a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties : Commitment List cc: Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Regional Administrator, NRC Region III Enforcement Officer, NRC Region I11 NRC Senior Resident Inspector NRC/NRR Project Manager USNRC Document Control Desk Utility Radiological Safety Board

Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR 2.201 - $5,450,000 EA-03-025; EA-05-C66; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA-05-069; EA-05-070; EA-05-071; EA-05-072 (4 pages to follow)

FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY'S ("FENOC") SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER 10 CFR § 2.201 - $5,450,000: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-68: EA-05-069; EA- 5-070; EA-05-071; AND EA-05-072 This supplements FENOC's September 14, 2005, response by amending FENOC's response to apparent Violation I.E. FENOC's earlier response remains unchanged in all other respects.

I. VIOLATIONS ASSESSED A CIV][L PENALTY Violation I.E.

A. 10 CFR 50.9 requires that information provided to the Commission by a licensee or information required by statute or by the Commission's regulations, orders, or license conditions to be maintained by the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.

NRC Bulletin 2001-01, "Circumferential Cracking of Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles," required all holders of operating licenses for pressurized water nuclear power reactors to provide information related to the structural integrity of the reactor vessel head penetration (VHP) nozzles for their respective facilities, including the extent of VIIP nozzle leakage and cracking that has been found to date, the inspections and repairs that have been undertaken to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, and the basis for concluding that their plans for future Inspections will ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

Contrary to the above, the licensee., a holder of an operating license for a pressurized water nuclear power reactor, the Davis-Besse Station, provided the Commission responses to Bulletin 2,001-01 which included materially inaccurate and incomplete information as follows:

1. In a September 4, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2731, the licensee made the following four materially inaccurate and incomplete statements:

(a) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.c, on page 2 of 19, stated:

"the minimum gap being at the dome center of the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head where it is approximately 2 inches, and does not impede a qualified visual inspection."

The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that, the statement contradicted statements in the licensee's documents identified as PCAQR 94-0295 and 96-0551, which clearly stated that inspection capability at the top of the reactor vessel head was limited.

The limitation was stated to be caused by the restricted access to the area through the service structure "weep holes", the curvature of the reactor pressure vessel head, and by the limited space to manipulate a camera due to the insulation that creates the two inch gap.

(b) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which requested inclusion of a description of any limitations (insulation or other impediments) to accessibility of the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head for visual examinations, did not include a description of any limitations.

The licensee's response was materially incomplete in that the response did not mention that accessibility to the bare metal of the reactor pressure vessel head was impeded, during the Eleventh (1998) and the Twelfth (2000) Refueling Outages, by the presence of significant accumulations of boric acid deposits.

(c) The licensee's response to Bulletin Item 1.d, which also requested a discussion of the findings of reactor pressure vessel head inspections, stated that for the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000), the inspection of the reactor pressure vessel head/nozzles indicated some accumulation of boric acid deposits.

The licensee's response was materially incomplete and inaccurate in that it mischaracterized the accumulation of boric acid on the reactor pressure vessel head and did not mention the evidence of corrosion that was evidenced by the pictures and the video examination of reactor pressure vessel head conditions documented at the beginning and ending of the Twelfth Refueling Outage (2000).

(d) The licensee's response to the Bulletin, on Page 3, stated: "The boric acid deposits were located beneath the leaking flanges with clear evidence of downward flow. No visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected."

The licensee's response was materially inaccurate in that the boric acid deposits were not all located under leaking flanges and the licensee lacked clear evidence of the absence of downward flow for all nozzles. Specifically, the presence of boric acid deposits was not limited only to the areas beneath the flanges, as implied by that statement. The build-up of boric acid deposits was so significant that the licensee could not inspect all of the nozzles. As a result, the licensee also did not have a basis for stating that no visible evidence of nozzle leakage was detected.

2. In an October 17, 2001, response to the Bulletin entitled, "Supplemental Response to Bulletin 2001-01," Serial 2735, the licensee stated: "In May 1996, during a refueling outage, the RPV [reactor pressure vessel] head was inspected. No leakage was identified, and these results have been recently verified by a re-review of the video tapes obtained from that inspection. The RPV head was mechanically cleaned at the end of the outage.

Subsequent inspections of the RPV head in the next two refueling outages (1998 and 2000), also did not identify any leakage in the CRDM [control rod drive mechanism] nozzle-to.-head areas that could be inspected. Video tapes taken during these inspections have also been re-reviewed."

The licensee's response was materially inaccurate, in that: (1) each reactor pressure vessel head control rod drive penetration was not inspected in May 1996, as documented in PCAQR 96-0551, and; (2) the reactor pressure vessel head, including the area around each control rod drive penetration, was not completely cleaned, as noted in PCAQR 98-0649, which was prepared at the start of the Eleventh Refueling Outage (1998), which stated that there were old boric acid deposits on the head.

This is a Severity Level I violation (Supplement VII).

Civil Penalty - $120,000 (EA-05-072)

FENOC Supplemental Replv to Violation I.E.

1. Admission or Denial of the Alleged Violation:

FENOC admits the alleged violation.

2. Reason(s) for the Alleged Violation:

Refer to the reasons cited in FENOC letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, Enclosure 1 reply to Violations I.B and II.C. Specifically, refer to the FENOC response to Violation II.C, which cites FENOC's Completeness and Accuracy Root Cause Report (Condition Report CR 2002-04914). These reasons, as related to the above described Violation I.E, are further described in the "Apparent Violation of 10CFR50.9, Completeness and Accuracy Of Information," Root Cause Report (CR 2002-04914, dated April 4, 2003).

In its original reply of September 14, 2005, FENOC denied this violation because it believed that, although in hindsight letters Serial Number 2731 and Serial Number 2735 could have been more clear, when read in context and when further considered with the totality of the information provided to the NRC over the fall of 2001, FENOC's collective response to Bulletin 2001-01 was complete and accurate in all material respects.

FENOC has reassessed its earlier position, as set forth in the Statement of Facts attached to the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, executed on January 19, 2006, and consequently, FENOC herein amends its earlier response and admits the alleged violation.

3. Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved:

The Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and the Results Achieved,"

are unchanged from FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190, dated September 14, 2005, response. FENOC's letter Serial Number 3190 Violation I.E. "Corrective Steps That Have Been Taken and Results Achieved," referred to Enclosure 1, reply to Violation I.B.

4. Corrective Steps To Avoid Further Violations:

See item 3, above.

5. Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved:

FENOC is currently in full compliance.

Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3225 COMMITMENT LIST The following list identifies those actions committed to by the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in this document. Any other actions discussed in the submittal represent intended or planned actions by Davis-Besse. They are described only as information and are not regulatory commitments. Please notify the Manager, Regulatory Compliance, at (419) 321-8585 at Davis-Besse of questions regarding any associated regulatory commitments.

COMMITMENTS DUE DATE None N/A

NRC OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE ROUTING AND APPROVAL FORM CCN #

ED 7159-9 (1) Letter No.: (2) Letter

Subject:

Supplemental Reply to Notice of Violation: EA-03-025; EA-05-066; EA-05-067; EA-05-068; EA Serial 3225 069; EA-05-070; EA-05-C71; EA-05-072 (3) Prepared By: J. Sturdavant D. Jenkins D. Ferraro Phone Ext: x8199 *825-5037 Morgan & Lewis (4) Documents Log 6292 Serial 3190 Associated With Letter:

(5) Date Response (6) Verification (7) Posting Reqjired (8) Commitments Contained in (9) Notary Required (or Due to the NRC: Package Developed? By 10 CFR 19.11? Letter? El Yes 0D No If yes, see affirmation contained in E N/A 1/23/06 0 Yes El No E Yes Z No commitment list included with letter. letter)? El Yes Z No (Target)

(10) Technical Review* (Print Name & Date Comments Section) Provided to Date No Attached Sig lature Reviewer Reviewed Comments on ED 6864 RA Cog J. Sturdavant /hiL 1/tt66 A/

Vrifie Pper Reviewer Cognizant RA Supervision /

J. Sturdavant J i11/ZZ/O2 cLb Legal - Morgan & Lewis J. Gutierrez 1__ 0 >:., ___° Director - Fleet Regulatory Affairs ,

G. Halnon ____Eli El

______ _E l El1

- _ l1 El

_ _El El1 Director - Performance Improvement R. Schrauder ' El Manager - Regulatory Affairs C. Price El Vice President, Nuclear M.Bezilla E President, FENOC 1,-A.

G. Leidich 7 IQxU J/Z76 if E If applicable: On-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date_ Off-Site Safety Review Committee Meeting Date (11) Additional Information [For Regulatory Affairs Use Only-Review comments must be documented on a Document Review Form (ED 6864)]

Validation Package available from Regulatory Compliance - J. Sturclavant x8199 In accordance with NG-RA-00804, "NRC Communications,' NOTE 6.3.10 in the interest of expediency the departmenth aao appr val of this submittal will be conducted in parallel. The cognizant Regulatory Compliance Supervisor has concurred with this parallel rou in i /OC)

--- Parallel Routinc --

Reviewed by Nuclear Oversight in accordance with NG-RA-00804 Step 6.3.19 to provide additional assurance of completeness and accuracy.

Name p ( . Date JL"X3/a(

  • Signatures indicate that the submittal was reviewed for accuracy and completeness and represents the facts to the best of the reviewer's knowledge and that no significant information has been excluded from the submittal.

Additional signatures may not be required from the Section/Department If responses are provided In writing and are signed by the Section/Department managers for providing input into the submittal. These documents should accompany the submittal when routing for final approvals.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML060390187&oldid=2587502"