ML051780380
| ML051780380 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/2005 |
| From: | Mallett B NRC Region 4 |
| To: | Overbeck G Arizona Public Service Co |
| References | |
| EA-05-037, IR-05-011 | |
| Download: ML051780380 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000528/2005011
Text
June 27, 2005
Gregg R. Overbeck, Senior Vice
President, Nuclear
Arizona Public Service Company
P.O. Box 52034
Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT 05000528/2005011,
05000529/2005011, AND 05000530/2005011)
Dear Mr. Overbeck:
This refers to the inspection of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (Palo Verde) emergency
plan changes, the results of which were documented in Palo Verde inspection report 2005-011
issued on April 5, 2005. On March 4, 2005, the results of this inspection were discussed with
members of your staff during an exit meeting at the Palo Verde facility. We informed Arizona
Public Service (APS) at that time that we had identified an apparent violation of NRC
requirements for which escalated enforcement action was being considered.
The apparent violation involved making a change to the Palo Verde emergency plan which
appeared to have decreased the plans effectiveness. Specifically, certain emergency action
level (EAL) definitions that relied on field radiation survey results were modified in a way that
made them technically inaccurate and unable to be implemented as written. NRC regulations in
10 CFR 50.54(q) permit a licensee to make emergency plan changes without NRC approval
only if the changes do not decrease the effectiveness of the plan.
In the letter transmitting the inspection report, we provided APS an opportunity to address the
apparent violation at a predecisional enforcement conference or in a written response before
NRC made a final enforcement decision. APS requested an opportunity for a conference, and
on June 1, 2005, a predecisional enforcement conference was conducted in the NRCs Region
IV office with members of the Palo Verde staff to discuss APSs position on the apparent
violation, its significance, its root cause, and any corrective actions taken or planned.
At the conference, APS admitted the violation, and attributed it, in part, to inadequate radiation
protection expertise in the emergency planning department, a failure to subject the plan change
to cross-organizational reviews, and a failure to provide appropriate training when
responsibilities for emergency plan changes were transferred from one organization to another.
APS acknowledged that the resulting conflict in procedural guidance (i.e., the EAL changes
were not consistent with existing implementing procedures) could delay classification of an
emergency or result in an event being mis-classified. APS stated that the potential for these
problems was minimal because the implementing procedures were still correct and because the
Arizona Public Service Co. -2-
training and knowledge of the radiation protection staff would overcome any confusion created
by the discrepant EALs.
APSs corrective actions were particularly comprehensive; most noteworthy was the action APS
took to probe beyond the specific violation to identify root causes which revealed program
weaknesses in knowledge transfer and cross-organizational reviews of plan changes. At the
conference, APS stated that it had taken the following actions: (1) revised the affected EALs to
their previous definitions; (2) reviewed other emergency plan changes involving EALs made
since 1994; (3) evaluated changes made to the Palo Verde security, fire protection and quality
assurance plans; (4) developed training and job qualification requirements for those making
emergency plan changes; (5) assigned radiation protection and operations personnel to the
emergency planning department; (6) coached emergency plan personnel in the need for rigor,
attention to detail and questioning attitude; and (7) assigned a new emergency plan manager.
Based on the information developed during the inspection, and consideration of the information
that APS provided during the conference, the NRC has determined that a violation of NRC
requirements occurred. The violation is cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) and
involved violating the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(q). Specifically, APS made an emergency
plan change that decreased the plans effectiveness, and did so without prior NRC approval.
This violation was assessed in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy because making
this plan change without NRC approval impacted the regulatory process.
While this violation did not result in any actual safety consequences, it created the potential for
confusion caused by differences between EAL definitions and emergency plan implementing
procedures. As APS acknowledged at the conference, this had the potential to delay
classification or result in mis-classification of an emergency. Also, the violation was indicative
of a larger problem in APSs review of emergency plan changes, as discovered during APSs
root cause analysis following the identification of the violation.
Therefore, this violation has been categorized in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy
at Severity Level III. In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a base civil penalty in the
amount of $65,000 is considered for a Severity Level III violation. Because Palo Verde was not
the subject of escalated enforcement action under the NRC Enforcement Policy in the 2 years
preceding the identification of this issue,1 the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for
Corrective Action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section VI.C.2 of
the Enforcement Policy. The NRC determined that corrective action credit was warranted
because APSs corrective actions, described earlier, were prompt and comprehensive.
Compliance was restored by revising the affected EALs to their previous definitions. This
results in no civil penalty being assessed for this violation.
Therefore, in recognition of the corrective actions taken, and in accordance with the provisions
of the NRC Enforcement Policy regarding treatment of prior escalated enforcement actions, I
have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, not to
propose a civil penalty in this case. However, significant violations in the future could result in a
1
APS was issued a Severity Level III violation and $50,000 civil penalty on April 8, 2005, for a 1992
violation of 10 CFR 50.59. However, that violation was reflective of performance more than a decade earlier, and the
citation for it was not within the 2-year period preceding the identification of the emergency plan change issue.
Arizona Public Service Co. -3-
civil penalty as there are now two examples of escalated enforcement action taken against APS
since April 2005.
APS is required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the
enclosed Notice when preparing a response. The NRC will use this response, in part, to
determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with
regulatory requirements.
APSs extent of condition review identified another violation involving an emergency plan
change made without NRC approval and which reduced the effectiveness of the plan.
Specifically, APS identified a change to an EAL definition involving core exit thermocouple
temperature readings which APS concluded was a decrease in plan effectiveness. This
violation would have warranted classification at Severity Level III. However, the NRC is
exercising enforcement discretion, as provided for in section VII.B.4 of the NRC Enforcement
Policy, and is electing not to consider enforcement action for this issue. Specifically, APS
identified this violation as part of its corrective action for the violation identified by the NRC and
took corrective action within a reasonable time following discovery, ultimately deciding to revise
the EAL to its previous version. In addition, the violation appears to have resulted from similar
weaknesses in the plan change process, and it would not substantially change the safety
significance of the initial violation.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its
enclosure, and APSs response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the
NRC Public Document Room or from the NRCs document system (ADAMS), accessible from
the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, the
response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so
that it can be made available to the Public without redaction. The NRC also includes significant
enforcement actions on its Web site at www.nrc.gov; select What We Do, Enforcement, then
Significant Enforcement Actions.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Bruce S. Mallett
Regional Administrator
Dockets: 50-528, 50-529, 50-530
Licenses: NPF-41, NPF-51, NPF-74
Enclosure: Notice of Violation
Arizona Public Service Co. -4-
cc w/Enclosure:
Steve Olea John Taylor
Arizona Corporation Commission Public Service Company of New Mexico
1200 W. Washington Street 2401 Aztec NE, MS Z110
Phoenix, AZ 85007 Albuquerque, NM 87107-4224
Douglas K. Porter, Senior Counsel Thomas D. Champ
Southern California Edison Company Southern California Edison Company
Law Department, Generation Resources 5000 Pacific Coast Hwy, Bldg. D1B
P.O. Box 800 San Clemente, CA 92672
Rosemead, CA 91770
Robert Henry
Chairman Salt River Project
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors 6504 East Thomas Road
301 W. Jefferson, 10th Floor Scottsdale, AZ 85251
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Brian Almon
Aubrey V. Godwin, Director Public Utility Commission
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency William B. Travis Building
4814 South 40 Street P.O. Box 13326
Phoenix, AZ 85040 1701 North Congress Avenue
Austin, TX 78701-3326
Craig K. Seaman, Director
Regulatory Affairs Karen O'Regan
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Environmental Program Manager
Mail Station 7636 City of Phoenix
P.O. Box 52034 Office of Environmental Programs
Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034 200 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Hector R. Puente
Vice President, Power Generation
El Paso Electric Company
310 E. Palm Lane, Suite 310
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Jeffrey T. Weikert
Assistant General Counsel
El Paso Electric Company
Mail Location 167
123 W. Mills
El Paso, TX 79901
John W. Schumann
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power
Southern California Public Power Authority
P.O. Box 51111, Room 1255-C
Los Angeles, CA 90051-0100
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Arizona Public Service Company Dockets: 50-528, 50-529, 50-530
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Licenses: NPF-41, NPF-51, NPF-74
During an NRC inspection conducted on September 29, 2004 to March 4, 2005, a violation of
NRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy, the
violation is listed below:
10 CFR 50.54(q) states in part, "A licensee authorized to possess and operate a nuclear
power reactor shall follow and maintain in effect emergency plans which meet the
standards in §50.47(b) and the requirements in appendix E of this part .... The nuclear
power reactor licensee may make changes to these plans without Commission approval
only if the changes do not decrease the effectiveness of the plans and the plans, as
changed, continue to meet the standards of §50.47(b) and the requirements of appendix
E to this part.
Contrary to the above, on September 29, 2004, and lasting until February 8, 2005, the
licensee made a change to its emergency plan without prior Commission approval which
decreased the plans effectiveness. The licensee removed a classifiable condition from
two emergency action level (EAL) definitions, which made the EALs technically
inaccurate and unable to be implemented as written. For example, with respect to EAL
3-16, the licensee removed the condition, "Site Boundary dose rate > 100 mrem/hr
Deep Dose Equivalent as measured with portable instrumentation," and replaced it with
"Field survey result or valid dose assessment indicates > 100 mrem TEDE or > 500
mrem thyroid CDE at the Site Boundary ...." Similar revisions were made to EAL 3-19.
The revised EALs could not be effectively implemented because field survey
instruments cannot directly determine TEDE (Total Effective Dose Equivalent). This
revision to the EALs decreased the effectiveness of the plans because it had the
potential to create confusion and delay an emergency classification or result in mis-
classifying an emergency classification.
This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement VIII).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Arizona Public Service Company is hereby
required to submit 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 IV, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that
is the subject of this Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of
Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation;
EA-05-037" and should include for each violation: (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. The 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
-2-
be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response
time.
If APS contests this enforcement action, it should also provide a copy of the response, with the
basis for its denial, to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Because APSs 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, it should
not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made
available to the public without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is
necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of the
response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your
response that deletes such information. If APS requests withholding of such material, it must
specifically identify the portions of your response that it seeks to have withheld and provide in
detail the bases for its 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.
Dated this 27th day of June 2005
Arizona Public Service Co., Palo Verde, EA-05-037
DISTRIBUTION:
RIDSSECYMAILCENTER
RIDSOCAMAILCENTER
RIDSEDOMAILCENTER
RIDSOEMAILCENTER
RIDSOGCMAILCENTER
RIDSNRROD
RIDSNRRADIP
RIDSOPAMAIL
RIDSOIMAILCENTER
RIDSOIGMAILCENTER
RIDSOCFOMAILCENTER
RIDSRGN1MAILCENTER
RIDSRGN2MAILCENTER
RIDSRGN3MAILCENTER
OEWEB
RIDSNRRDIPMIIPB
via e-mail:
Sanborn - GFS Vasquez - GMV
Gwynn - TPG Mallett - BSM1
R4ALLEGE Smith - KDS1
Maier - WAM Chamberlain - DDC
Howell - ATH Lantz - REL
Powers - DAP Vegel - AXV
Gody - ATG Elkmann - PJE
Kahler - REK Pruett - TWP
Warnick - GXW2 Gardin - KEG
OEMAIL Starkey - DRS
Franovich - RLF2 Tschiltz - MDT
SISP Review Completed: GFS ADAMS: : Yes Initials: GFS
- Publicly Available : Non-Sensitive
DOCUMENT NAME:ML051780380.wpd
ACES C:OB C:DRP/D D:DRS
SANBORN GODY PRUETT CHAMBERLAIN
/RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/
6/13/2005 6/20/2005 6/14/2005 6/17/2005
FULLER JOHNSON GWYNN MALLETT
/RA/ C. Nolan for viaE /RA/ /RA/
6/17/2005 6/23/2005 6/20/2005 6/23/2005
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax