ML20128H290
See also: IR 05000424/1990019
Text
,
.
DRAFT
PREDECISIONAL INFORMATION
NOT FOR RELEASE WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE DIRECTOR, OE
Rev. 10: VOGCOVER.R10 3/8/94
Docket No. 50-424
License No. NPF-68 I
EA 93-304, EA 94-036, EA 94-037, and EA 94-052
Georgia Power Company
,
l
ATTN: Mr. H. Allen Franklin 1
President and Chief Executive Officer
Post Office Box 1295
Birmingham, Alabama 35201
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATIO
AND DEMANDS FOR INFORMATION (NRC
OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS REPORT NO. 2-90-020 AND NRC
INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-424,425/90-19, SUPPLEMENT 1)
This refers to the investigation conducted by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's Office of Investigations (OI) at Georgia
Power Company's (GPC) Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP)
which was completed on December 17, 1993. The investigation was
initiated as a result of information received in June 1990 by
Region II alleging, in part, that material false statements were
made to the NRC by senior officials of GPC regarding the
reliability of the Diesel Generators (DGs). The pertinent events
involved in this matter are described below.
On March 20, 1990, during a refueling outage at VEGP Unit 1, GPC
declared a Site Area Emergency (SAE) when offsite power was lost
concurrent with the failure of the only Unit 1 DG that was
available (1A). The other Unit 1 DG (1B) was unavailable due to
maintenance activities.
The NRC immediately responded to the SAE at the VEGP site with an
Augmented Inspection Team (AIT). The NRC effort was upgraded to
an Incident Investigation Team (IIT) on March 23, 1990. The IIT
was composed of NRC Headquarters technical staff and industry
personnel. The results of this investigation are documented in
NUREG-1410, " Loss of Vital AC Power and the Residual Heat Removal
System During Mid-Loop Operations at Vogtle Unit 1 on March 20,
1990."
On March 23, 1990, the NRC issued a Confirmation of Action Letter
(CAL) to GPC that, among other things, confirmed that GPC had
agreed not to return VEGP Unit 1 to criticality until the
Regional Administrator was satisfied that appropriate corrective
actions had been taken, and that the plant could safely return to
power operations.
t
/
_
Information in this record was deleted
9610090300 960827
in aCCordance with
Act, exemnts'oas
g A- F.;.,
f p
3 the Fr$edom of information
_
[/
WILMOTH95-81 PDR
-
.
,
, - - - - -
.~,
.
Georgia Power Company -2 -
On April 9, 1990, GPC made a presentation to the NRC in the
Region II offices in support of GPC's request to return VEGP
Unit 1 to power operations. As part of this presentation, GPC
provided information on DG starts in response to a specific NRC
request that GPC address DG reliability in its April 9
presentation. GPC submitted a written summary of its April 9
presentation in an April 9, 1990 letter, "Vogtle Electric
Generating Plant Confirmation of Action Letter."
On April 12, 1990, the NRC formally granted permission for VEGP
Unit 1 to return to criticality and resume power operations.
On April 19, 1990, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.73, GPC submitted
Licensee Event Report (LER) 50-424/90-06, " Loss of Offsite Power
Leads to Site Area Emergency."
On June 29, 1990, GPC submitted a revised LER, 50-424/90-06-01.
The purpose of the submittal was to clarify information related
to successful DG starts that were discussed in the April 9, 1990
letter ano the April 19, 1990 LER, and to update the status of
corrective actions in the original LER.
From August 6 through August 17, 1990, the NRC conducted a
Special Team Inspection at VEGP, as a result of NRC concerns
about, and allegations related to, VEGP operational activities.
This inspection examined the technical validity and safety
significance of the allegations, but did not investigate alleged
wrongdoing. The Special Team informed GPC that the June 29, 1990
submittal failed to address the April 9, 1990 data and requested
that GPC clarify DG starts reported on April 9, 1990. Results of
this inspection are documented, in part, in NRC Inspection Report
No. 50-424,425/90-19, Supplement 1, dated November 1, 1991.
On August 30, 1990, GPC submitted a letter, " Clarification of
Response to Confirmation of Action Letter." The purpose of the
submittal was to clarify the diesel start information that was
addressed in the April 9, 1990 submittal.
The NRC has carefully reviewed the evidence associated with these
events, submittals, and representations to the NRC.
Specifically, the NRC reviewed information gathered as part of
the OI investigation, information gathered during the IIT, NUREG-
1410, Supplement 1 of NRC Inspection Report 90-19, discovery
responses in the Vogtle operating license amendment proceeding
(Docket Nos. 50-424 OLA-3, 50-425 OLA-3), and other related
information.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _
_ . _
^
t
j -
1
(
l -
- 7
I
l
i
'
Georgia Power Company -3 -
. . . . .
,
1
i
t
I
!
,
!
,
'
personally involved in the preparation of the data regarding
the DG reliability and tasked the Unit Superintendent with
l
[
collecting the number of successful DG starts for the 1A and
I 1B DGs.
l
l
l
In fact, the VEGP General ,
- Manager stated no criteria for successful starts, a term not l
l fully defined, when he directed the Unit Superintendent to
gather successful DG starts. The Unit Superintendent
l collected DG start data from the Control Room Log and the
yed
totals to the VEGP General Manager for the 1A and 1B
diesels.
i
l
1
i
l Information was then presented to the NRC in an
l
l April 9, 1990 oral presentation by the VEGP General Manager
and in an April 9, 1990 letter that since March 20, 1990,
l there were 18 and 19 successful consecutive starts on the 1A
and IB DGs, respectively, without problems or failures.
f
the 19 trouble-free starts for the 1B DG that GPC
reported in the presentation and letter included three
g
starts with problems that occurred during DG
f
overhaul / maintenance activities (a high lube oil temperature
l
trip on March 22, 1990; a low jacket water pressure / turbo
j lube oil pressure low trip on March 23, 1990; and a failure
]
to trip on a high jacket water temperature alarm occurring
i on March 24, 1990). The correct number of consecutive
j successful starts was 12 for the IB DG--a number
a
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- . - _ . . . - . . . _ . . _ _ . - - - _ _ - - . . . - - - _ _ _ - _ _ - - - - -
..
(
!
! .
l
'
Georgia Power Company -4 -
April 9,
less than that reported by GPC to the NRC on
1990.
l
l
,
!
The air for starting a DG and operating i
its
air system.
instruments and controls is derived from the starting
The starting air system contains dryers
designed to maintain moisture content (i.e., dew point) at
,
main * mance records and deficiency cards associated with
Unit 1 would have revealed that high dew points were also ,
l
attributab2e to system air dryers occasionally being out of
i
service for extended periods and to system repressurization i
following maintenance, as documented in NRC Inspection
Report No. 50-424,425/90-19, Su lement 1
i i
1991. November 1,
r--
l
t
'
-
,
.
l
1
!
i
1
' LER 90-006, submitted to the NRC on April 19, 1990, was
based, in part, on information presented to the NRC on April
-
- preparation of the LER, the Acting VEGP Assistant General
I.
. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ -
_
.. ..
l
, ,
. _ _ . . . . . - . . , . . -
a .
i
J
Georgia Power Company -5-
Manager - Plant Support questioned the accuracy of the
1990 letter given that there were tri s on the IB
MApril9,
DG after March 20, 1990.
4
In later discussions regarding the
draft LER, the General Manager, Technical Support Manager
and Acting VEGP Assjstant General Manager - Plant-Support
acknowledged that they could not identify the specific DG
start that represented the starting point for the count
presented to the NRC, i.e., the first start following
complc* ion of the CTP. There were also different
interpretations about what testing the term CTP encompassed.
The General Manager - Plant Support (Vogtle Project), the
VEGP Technical Support Manager, and the Acting VEGP
'
Assistant General Manager - Plant Support were aware that
the VEGP General Manager had earlier stated that his April 9
'
count began after instrument recalibration. The Acting VEGP
Assistant General Manager - Plant Support stated that his
understanding of the CTP was that it would be a test program
.
to determine root causes and restore operability. =mmmmmm
'
Superintendent who collected the original April 9th data
advised the Acting VEGP Assistant General Manager - Plant
j
'
Support and the VEGP Technical Support Manager that he
started his counts on March 20, prior to the time when a CTP
. could have been completed.
l
i
j the 1A and 1B DG start counts reported on
April 19, 1990 overstated the actual counts by including
starts that were part of the test program.
.
i
the DGs--the failure of which was the very
a
issue that caused an extended shutdown. GPC was edEEEEE7 aware of
the NRC's interest in the DGs, in that che NRC specifically asked
y GPC to address DG r,e[iability as part of its restart presentation _
for April 9, 1990.
<
.- - - - - _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . - _ . _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ . . . _ . . _ . _ _ _
,
.._
l
4
! *
l
!
I
i
I Georcia Power Company -
6-
l
i
j
,
!
l
4
r
i
L
l
!
I
!
'
,
4
l
'
l
l
l
i
d
k
B
, _-- _--.- -. - - - . - . - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- --
-
!
}
.
,
.l
l
!
!-
1
l
i
l
j Georgia Power Company -7 -
i
)
On April 30, 1990, l
t e Acting VEG Assistant General Manager - Plant Support
gave the VEGP General Manager a listin of 1B DG starts, l
i
After being informed that the April 19 DG start counts were
in error, the Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations
i
informed the Regional Administrator that a revision to the
l April 19 LER would be submitted, in part, to correct the DG ,
!
start counts. After being provided conflicting data for the '
sc ond time, the Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations
again notified the Regional Administrator. He also
requested that an audit be conducted by GPC's Safety Audit
and Engineering Review (SAER) group to establish the correct
data and to determine why the errors were made. The audit,
completed June 29, narrowly focused on a review of diesel
records (Test Data Sheets, Shift Supervisor's Log, and
Diesel Generator Start Log) to verify the number of DG
starts. The audit did not identify any specific cause for
the error in the number reported in the LER. The audit
stated, however, that the error appeared to result from
incomplete documentation. The audit also noted that there
apparently was some confusion about the specific oint at
which the test program was completed.
_
-
- - _ _ ,
--
On June 29, 1990, the draft cover letter for the LER
i
revision was being reviewed at the site. The draft had
l
originated in GPC corporate headquarters and included
language personally developed by the Senior Vice President -
,
Nuclear Operations and the Vice Presioent - Vogtle Project.
l During the site review, a VEGP Technical Assistant (TA)
{ (formerly the Acting VEGP Assistant General Manager - Plant
i
j
Support) noted that the letter was incomplete and challenged
the accuracy of the reasons stated in the draft cover letter I
1 in conversations with the Supervisor - SAER, the VEGP
i
j
Assistant General Manager - Plant Support, the VEGP Manager
!
- Englaeering Support, and a Licensing Engineer - Vogtle
Project. The VEGP TA stated that: (1) the letter failed to
l clarify the DG starts reported on April 9, (2) DG record
keeping practices were not a cause of the difference in the
DG starts reported in the April 19 LER because adequate
. _ _ - - . _ _ - . - - , _
'
I
i
.
,
i
i
i
'
i
i
l
!
Georgia Power Company -8 -
i
! information was available when the counting errors were
i
made, and (3) the erroneous counts resulted from personnel
l errors in developing the count.
!
l
l President - Vogtle Project and the Senior Vice Pres.ident -
Nuclear Operations were actively involved in the preparation
,
l
of the Ju;.e 29 cover letter. The VEGP General Manager and
' lice President - Vogtle Project reviewed, and the Senior
Vice President - Nuclear Operations signed, the June 29
cover letter which stated that its purpose was, in part, to
clarify information provided to the NRC on April 9.
l
1
!
l
1
6 the April 9, 1990 letter. 1: e 2eccoi
l stated that the errors in the April 9 letter and
presentation and the April 19 LER were caused, in part, by
.
confusion in the distinction between a successful start and
i ._ ..__ _ __ ._ _ _ _ _ ____
_
-_ _ _ _____ _ ___ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _____ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
l '
a
i=
!
,
Georgia Power Company -9-
6 During the August 29, 1990 Plant Review Board
meeting, the VEGP Manager - Technical Support questioned if
4
!
the Unit Superintendent (the individual who originally
collected the DG start data) was confused in the distinction
l between a successful start and a valid tect. The VEGP
l General Manager admitted that the Unit Superintendent was
i not confused about the distinction when he collected the
data which was used to prepare the April 9 letter, but
, stated that the sentence was not in error because other
j people were confused. The VEGP General Manager acknowledged
j that there was confusion among individuals after April 9,
l but admitted that the Unit Superintendent was not confused
when ha develoned the information, l
!
l
l
l
l
\ l
h
i l
I
!
I The
!
August 30 letter states that the error in the April 9 letter
I and presentation and the April 19 LER were caused, in part,
by an error made by the individual who performed the count
!
While GPC undertook efforts to
! correct the April 19 LER, it narrowly focused only on that
submittal. For example, GPC conducted an audit, the scope
of which was limited to review of DG records, in an attempt
to correct the start count reported in the April 19 LER.
Furthermore, in its June 29 submittal, while GPC referred to
both the April 9 letter and the April 19 LER, it attempted
i to explain only the reasons for the error in the April 19
l LER. The Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations and the
{ Vice President - Vogtle Project were directly involved in
1 the development of the June 29 letter.
!
j Subsequen y,
I the NRC requested that GPC make a submittal addressing the
.
i
.-- __.-..~ - - -
_ . - . ~ _ - - _ - - - - . . . - . - _ - . .--- _-- . _ _ _ -
.,
I
i
!
!'
!
Georgia Power Company - 10 -
The Vice President - Vogtle Project committed during the
August 17 meeting with the NRC special inspection team to
he April 9
letter.
mprovideclarificationt
i
l
GPC forwarded a submittal regarding the
April 9 letter on August 30 that was drafted at corporate
headquarters under the direction of the Vice President -
Vogtle Project, without an assessment of the actions of the
VEGP General Manager and the Unit Superintendent who
j developed erroneous information for the April 9 letter. M
i
.
l
!
\
I
l
l
l
i
!
1
i
1
i
l
t
I _. .__ _ _ . . . _ ,
. ._ . _ - _ - . _ _ _
.
. - . . _ . . . _ - - . . _. -. . . - ~ - - .-. _ . . . - - - -. . .
'l
.
.
i
j I
,
J
i i
! .
> ,
I, l
1
i
Georgia Power Company
'
i
- 11 -
'
J
q !
! I
,
I
e
-
I
! i
i
4
1
1
1
!
,
4
i
l
!
.
i
a
1
i
.
_._ . _- _.
_ _ _ -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . -
_ ___
,
l
i
!
!<
Georgia Power Company - 12 -
N focused on actions and communications involving the DGs, OI also
reviewed other communications within a particular time-frame and
made a general observation that GPC exhibited a closed,
adversarial attitude toward the NRC.
6
l
l
l
l
l
l
!
k
I
!
,
f
.
. - . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. - _ - - . . _ . - - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _
.
.
6
Georgia Power Company - 13 -
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are
j not subject to the clearance procedures of the office of Manage-
ment and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.
Sincer(ly,
j
!
'
James L. Milhoan
Deputy Executive Director
i
for Nuclear Reactor Regulation,
Regional Operations,and Research
4
Enclosures:
) 1. t
i
2. Demand For Information Regarding Messrs. Thomas V. Greene,
Georgie R. Frederick, Harry W. Majors, and Michael W. Horton
i 3. Demand For Information Regarding Mr. C.
Kenneth McCoy
'
i 4. Demand For Information Regarding Mr. George
Bockhold, Jr.
i
j
i
$
i
i
i
d
i
j
i
,
4
i
__ -
1 .
1
! *
I
'
.
i
!
i
i DRAFT
PREDECISIONAL INFORMATION
HQI-fRR(L EA SEAlf TH0(I@PPRDVAl.gEGTOW
!
Rev. 8: V0GPAPER.R8 3/8/94
l
!
j
i March XX. 1994 l
1
SECY-94-XXX i
1
I
! FOR: The Commissioners l
l
l FROM: James M. Taylor
Executive Director for Operations
i
! SUBJECT:
' PROPOSED ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST GEORGIA POWER l
COMPANY, V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT
'
l
(EA 93-304, EA 94-036, EA 94-037, and EA 94-052)
PURPOSE:
l To consult with the Commission regarding the issuance of a Notice of Violation
) and Demands for
Information to the Georgia Power GPC)
4
4
l
1
l BACKGROUND:
i
j On March 20, 1990, during a refueling outage at Vogtle Electric Generating
,
Plant (VEGP) Unit 1, GPC declared a Site Area Emergency (SAE) when offsite
power was lost concurrent with the failure of the only Unit 1 Diesel Generator
I
(DG) that was available (IA). The other Unit 1 DG (18) was unavailable due to
1
maintenance activities.
.i
The NRC immediately responded to the SAE at the VEGP site with an Augmented
Inspection Team (AIT) which was subsequently upgraded to an Incident
Investigation Team (IIT) on March 23, 1990.
4
' On March 23, 1990, the NRC issued a Confirmation of Action Letter (CAL) to GPC
that, among other things, confirmed that GPC had agreed not to return VEGP
i Unit I to criticality until the Regional Administrator was satisfied that
i
appropriate corrective actions h-d been taken, and that the plant could safely
,
return to power operations.
,
j information in this raccrd wa; dele!d
i
in accordance with the Freedom of information
i sa T
) Act, exemptp5W
101A- / '
1
- ,.-
. . _ . - - = -
~
i( \
4
. . -.- - - , - . - , .
_ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _____ _ __.___._ _ _ ___ _ _._._ _ _
,
!
!,
!
!
l*
!
I
i
j The Commissioners -3 -
i
l collected by 01 on the allegations. The Vogtle Coordinating Group (Group) was
l also tasked with identifying any violations and developing a detailed analysis
l of the evidence in support of its conclusions.
i
l In addition to this enforcement proceeding, there is an ongoing Atomic Safety
j and Licensing Board (ASLB) proceeding considering the transfer of the
l erating license from GPC to Southern Nucl
!
!
l
t
i
l DISCUSSION:
!
The 01 investigation concluded that evidence uncovered by 01 supports a
i finding of deliberate failures on the part of GPC officials to provida the NRC
l with information t'at is complete and accurate in all material respect::. 01
l concluded that:
i
2
j (1) the VEGP General Manager (George Bockhold, Jr.) deliberately presented
l incomplete and inaccurate information regarding the testing of the VEGP
Unit 1 DGs during an oral presentation to the NRC on April 9, 1990,
(2) GPC submitted inaccurate and incomplete information regarding DG test
results in a letter to NRC dated April 9, 1990, as a result of :
deliberate actions by Mr. Bockhold, ,
j (3) GPC submitted inaccurate and incomplete information regarding DG air
i quality in the April 9 letter to the NRC, as a result of deliberate o
actions by Mr Bockhold, !
.:
(4) the Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations (George W. Hairston,
111), with, at a minimum, careless disregard, submitted a false j
statement of diesel test results to the NRC in Licensee Event Report .g
(LER) No.90-006, dated April 19, 1990, as a direct result of deliberate 's
actions by a group of senior managers including Mr. Hairston, the Vice
President - Vogtle Project (C. Kenneth McCoy), the Corporate General ;
j Manger of Plant Support (William B. Shipman), and Mr. Bockhold, !
k
(b) Mr. Hairston, with, at a minimum, careless disregard, submitted a false
statement to NRC in the letter of transmittal of a revision to LER 90-
006, dated June 29, 1990, .
1
Mr. McCoy, with, at a minimum, careless disregard, submitted both a
,
'
1 (6)
j false statement and a misleading statement in the GPC clarification of
j Confirmation of Action response letter to NRC dated August 30, 1990, and
a
I
I
i
l Licensee organiunonal chart > are incluJed in Enclosure 2.
.
4
.
. _ . . _ . -
_. _ .
_ _. _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . _ - . . _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . _ _ . . . _ . _ - - _ _
i
.
.
_ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . . . . . . . .
,
I
!
!
i
s
!
I
f The Commissioners -5 -
Finally, the Group reviewed numerout, audio tapes and other evidentiary
. materials associated with DG testing during the Ma~rch-Aug0st 1990 time frame.
i
!
4
I
i
l
i
l
k
i
\
1
l
I
\
i
!
,
i
i
4
k
i
t
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - -
_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .- - - -_.
,
,
i
q . . .
. ,
. .
.
I
,t
I *
4
i
i
t
t
The Comissioners -6-
l 1
i
i
1 l
l
l
f
!
1
!
1
J
!
1
e
i
l
i
4
'
!
!
l
1
l
l
i
D
.
.
I
!
I
e
I
i
l
,
i
<
d
i
!
!
!
l
<
1
i
1
1
i
e
!
$
<
l
i
}
.
, ,,,w- . - - , , , , , - , , .
- - - - - - - - - , - ~ - - - - - - - - - - -
, - - - - - - , , . - - - - - , - - - , - - - ,
__ _ - _ - _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _._- -
.-.
i
1
- '
l
,
(
-
1
t
i
i
1
4
i
4
4
4
1
The Comissioners -7-
l
'.
9
). -
4
1
1
j
!
l
.
4
,,
1
!
1
i
i
i
I
5
?
4
i
)
1
i
9
d
n
l
.,
4
i
'
,'
i
i
k
I
l
.
4
- - - , - -
.
.- ._-. _ _
- . -
J ;
^
l
. .
I l
4
,
l
e
The Commissioners -8 -
f i
!LOIE: This paper and its issues should not be publicly disclosed because the l
],
matter involves sensitive as well as predecisional enforcement issues.
l
l
!
-.
1
- James M. Taylor
j Executive Director for Operations .
i Enclosures: I
'
'
l. 01 Report 2-90-020R
i 2. Licensee Organization Charts
j 3- Vogtle Coordinating Group Analysis
~ *
! an ceNn"s
i
i
i l
1
l
l i
! l
i l
i
I
I
' !
l
!
!
>
k
l
!
!
,.
i
l
1
J
l
I
!
i
$
1
i
!
<
n
i
l
i
a
, ,-
- ~_. _