ML071210538
| ML071210538 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 05/01/2007 |
| From: | David Lew Division Reactor Projects I |
| To: | Peter Dietrich Entergy Nuclear Northeast |
| References | |
| EA-07-029 1-2006-014 | |
| Download: ML071210538 (8) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I475 ALLENDALE ROADKING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 May 1, 2007EA-07-029Mr. Peter T. DietrichSite Vice President Entergy Nuclear Northeast James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power PlantPost Office Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION(NRC Investigation Report No. 1-2006-014)
Dear Mr. Dietrich:
This letter refers to the investigation conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations (OI),Region I between January 4, 2006, through September 22, 2006, at the James A. FitzPatrick (JAF) Nuclear Power Plant. The purpose of the investigation was to determine (1) whether two nuclear plant operators (NPOs) permitted a radiation protection technician (RPT) to manipulatea valve for the reactor building ventilation system and remove safety tagging documentation from the same valve; and, (2) whether the two NPOs then created an inaccurate record regarding the completed tagging documentation.Based on its investigation, OI substantiated that: (1) the two NPOs, one of whom holds an NRCoperating license, deliberately permitted the RPT to remove safety tagging from the valve on June 30, 2005, and the RPT did so, even though all three individuals knew that the RPT was not qualified to do so; and, (2) the two NPOs created a false record indicating that they had removed the tag, realigned the valve to its required open position, and performed the second verification of tag removal and valve positioning. Although the RPT did not actually manipulate plant equipment (i.e, he did not change the valve position), a violation of the Technical Specifications and station procedures nonetheless occurred as a result of the deliberate actions by the three individuals. A factual summary of the OI investigation is enclosed.The NRC has evaluated this Technical Specification violation in accordance with the NRCEnforcement Policy. The violation has been classified at Severity Level IV. Although the underlying safety significance of the violation was minor since it did not impact the safety function of the reactor building ventilation system, the NRC has increased the severity of the violation to Severity Level IV, in accordance with Section IV.A.4 of the Enforcement Policy, after considering that the violation involved deliberate misconduct, and one of the NPOs is an NRC licensed reactor operator at the facility. The current NRC Enforcement Policy is included on the Mr. P. Dietrich2NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov
- select Public Meetings & Involvement, Enforcement,then Enforcement Policy.The violation is cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (NOV), and the circumstancessurrounding it are described in the aforementioned factual summary of the OI Report. The NRC considered issuing a non-cited violation (NCV) for this violation since you initially identifiedthe violation and subsequently wrote a condition report. However, the NRC decided that issuance of an NOV was more appropriate, given that (1) Entergy did not recognize the willful aspects of the violation; (2) Entergy did not inform appropriate NRC personnel of the violation; and, (3) one of the individuals responsible for the violation has a reactor operator license, and therefore is considered a "licensee official" within the context of the NRC Enforcement Policy.
The NRC recognizes that the licensed operator was not conducting licensed duties at the time of the violation.You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in theenclosed Notice when preparing your response. In addition to the instructions in the enclosed Notice, your response should also address the aspects of this concern, as described above, that resulted in our issuing an NOV. The NRC will use your response, in part, to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.Please note that final NRC documents, such as the entire OI report, may be made available tothe public under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) subject to redaction of information appropriate under FOIA. Requests made under the FOIA should be made in accordance with 10 CFR 9.23, Requests for Records.In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, itsenclosures, and your response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRC's document system (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, yourresponse should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the public without redaction. Sincerely,/RA by James Clifford/David C. Lew, DirectorDivision of Reactor ProjectsDocket No. 50-333 License No. DPR-59
Enclosures:
Notice of ViolationFactual Summary of OI Investigation Mr. P. Dietrich3cc w/encl:G. J. Taylor, Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Operations M. R. Kansler, President, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
J. T. Herron, Senior Vice President for Operations M. Balduzzi, Senior Vice President, Northeastern Regional Operations W. Campbell, Senior Vice President of Engineering and Technical Services C. Schwarz, Vice President, Operations Support K. Mulligan, General Manager, Plant Operations O. Limpias, Vice President, Engineering (ENO)
J. McCann, Director, Licensing (ENO)
C. Faison, Manager, Licensing (ENO)
M. Colomb, Director of Oversight (ENO)
D. Wallace, Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance J. Costedio, Manager, Regulatory Compliance T. McCullough, Assistant General Counsel (ENO)
P. Smith, President, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority P. Eddy, New York State Department of Public Service S. Lyman, Oswego County Administrator Supervisor, Town of Scriba C. Donaldson, Esquire, Assistant Attorney General, New York Department of Law J. Sniezek, PWR SRC Consultant M. Lyster, PWR SRC Consultant S. Lousteau, Treasury Department, Entergy Services Mr. P. Dietrich2The violation is cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (NOV), and the circumstances surrounding it are describedin the aforementioned factual summary of the OI Report. The NRC considered issuing a non-cited violation (NCV)for this violation since you initially identified the violation and subsequently wrote a condition report. However, theNRC decided that issuance of an NOV was more appropriate, given that (1) Entergy did not recognize the willful aspects of the violation; (2) Entergy did not inform appropriate NRC personnel of the violation; and, (3) one of theindividuals responsible for the violation has a reactor operator license, and therefor e is considered a "licenseeofficial" within the context of the NRC Enforcement Policy. The NRC recognizes that the licensed operator was not conducting licensed duties at the time of the violation.You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice whenpreparing your response. In addition to the instructions in the enclosed Notice, your response should also addressthe aspects of this concern, as described above, that resulted in our issuing an NOV. The NRC will use yourresponse, in part, to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance withregulatory requirements.Please note that final NRC documents, such as the entire OI report, may be made available to the public under theFreedom of Information Act (FOIA) s ubject to redaction of information appropriate under FOIA. Requests madeunder the FOIA should be made in accordance with 10 CFR 9.23, Requests for Records.In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosures, and yourresponse will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from theNRC's document system (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/r eading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the public without redaction. Sincerely,
/RA by James Clifford/David C. Lew, Director Division of Reactor ProjectsDocket No. 50-333 License No. DPR-59
Enclosures:
Notice of ViolationFactual Summary of OI InvestigationDISTRIBUTION w/encl
- ADAMS (PARS)
SECY CA OEMAIL LReyes, EDO WKane, DEDR JDyer, NRR MWeber, NRR BBoger, NRR JLamb, OEDO CCarpenter, OE SMerchant, OE LTrocine, OE LSreenivas, OE Lucia Lopez, OEOlive Samuel, OELChandler, OGC Mary Elwood, OGC BJones, OGC EHayden, OPA HBell, OIG GCaputo, OI LTremper, OC Enforcement Coordinators
RII, RIII, RIV SCollins, RA MDapas, RA DScrenci/NSheehan, RI
KFarrar, RI DHolody, RIRSummers, RIEWilson, OI/RI DLew, RI, DRP ECobey, RI, DRP DJackson, RI, DRP GHunegs, RI, DRP DDempsey, RI, DRP ABlough, RI, DRS MGamberoni, RI, DRS MSykes, RI, DRS ADeFrancisco, RI C. O'Daniell, RI R1DRP_Mail Region I OE Files (with
concurrences) - SUNSI Review Complete: RJS (Reviewer's Initials
)DOCUMENT NAME: C:\FileNet\ML071210538.wpdAfter declaring this document "An Official Agency Record" it will be released to the Public.To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
" C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure " E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure " N" = No copyOFFICERI/ORADRS/OLBDRP/BCDRS/OIRI/RCNAMERSummersMSykesECobeyEWilson KFarrarDATE03/12/0703/22/0703/29/0703/27/0703/29/07OFFICERI/ORADRP/DDNAMEDHolodyDLewDATE03/29/0705/01/07OFFICIAL RECORD COPY NOTICE OF VIOLATIONEntergy Nuclear OperationsDocket No. 50-333James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Generating StationLicensee No. DPR-59EA-07-029During an investigation conducted by the NRC's Office of Investigations completed onSeptember 22, 2006, a violation of NRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy, the violation is listed below:FitzPatrick Technical Specification 5.4.1, "Administrative Controls - Procedures,"requires procedures to be established, implemented, and maintained covering activities in Regulatory Guide 1.33 (Safety Guide 33), "Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation)," Appendix A, dated November 1972. Safety Guide 33, Appendix A, Part A.3, requires procedures for equipment control (e.g.locking and tagging). Procedure EN-OP-102, "Protective and Caution Tagging," Revision 0, in part, requiresthat persons performing tagger and verifier positions be qualified to hang, remove, or verify tags. Step 5.16, in part, requires the tagger to remove the tag, place the component in the required position, and sign the documentation as the first restoration verifier. Step 5.17, in part, requires the verifier (second tagger) to verify that the tag is removed, verify the component is in the required position, and sign the documentation as the second restoration verifier.Contrary to the above, on June 30, 2005, a procedure for equipment control was notimplemented as required by technical specifications. Specifically: (1) a radiationprotection technician, a person not qualified per EN-OP-102, removed the tag from valve 39IAS-2170 for the reactor building ventilation system; and, (2) the tagger and the verifier (nuclear plant operators) signed documentation that they had removed the tag, realigned the valve to its required open position, and performed the second verification of tag removal and valve positioning, without actually performing these actions.This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Entergy Nuclear Operations is hereby required tosubmit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region I, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice of Violation (Notice), within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation; EA-07-029" and should include: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation or severity level, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
Notice of Violation2If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response, withthe basis for your denial, to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.Because your response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRCPublic Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the public without redaction. ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). If personalprivacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, you must specifically identify the portions of your response thatyou seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.390(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.In accordance with 10 CFR 19.11, you may be required to post this Notice within 2 workingdays.Dated this 1st day of May 2007 FACTUAL
SUMMARY
OF OI INVESTIGATIONREPORT NO. 1-2006-014OI Investigation No. 1-2006-014 reviewed an event involving a failure to properly conduct atagging evolution at the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) that occurred on June 30, 2005. This investigation was initiated on January 4, 2006, to determine: (1) if two nuclear plant operators (NPOs) at JAF permitted a radiation protection technician (RPT) to manipulate a valve and remove tagging documentation from the same valve which the RPT was not qualified to do; and, (2) whether the NPOs then created an inaccurate record of the tagging documentation.The evidence indicates that the two NPOs created an inaccurate record of the taggingdocumentation by electronically signing that they had removed a tag from valve, 39IAS-2170, in the reactor building ventilation system, when, in fact, an RPT had removed the tag.The RPT testified that he knew he was not qualified to remove the tag from the valve, but hadvolunteered to do the task nonetheless. Also, the RPT testified that he informed the two NPOs that the valve was in the open position, but also testified that he had not manipulated the valve position.The two NPOs, both very experienced, one of whom holds an NRC reactor operator license,testified that they knew the RPT was not qualified to remove the tag (perform the tagger or verifier tasks) from the valve, but nonetheless permitted the RPT to do so.After the tag was removed by the RPT, the NPOs knowingly entered inaccurate information intothe tag-out database, indicating that they had removed the tag, placed the valve in the required position, and verified the activity. During a subsequent failed test of the reactor building ventilation system, it was determined thatvalve, 39IAS-2170, was in the closed position and not opened as required by the tagging evolution completed by the two NPOs per Procedure EN-OP-102, "Protective and Caution Tagging."