ML18100A222

Response to Appeal of NRC Letter Upholding Disputed Violation Documented in Evaluation of Changes, Tests, and Experiments Baseline Inspection Report 05000454/2017009, 050000455/2017009

ML18100A222
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	04/09/2018
From:	West K S NRC/RGN-III
To:	Kanavos M E Exelon Generation Co
Heck J K
References
EA-17-138 IR 2017009
Download: ML18100A222 (3)

See also: IR 05000454/2017009

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III 2443 WARRENVILLE RD. SUITE 210 LISLE, ILLINOIS 60532-4352 April 9, 2018 EA-17-138

Mr. Mark Kanavos

Site VP, Byron Generating Station 4450 North German Church Rd Byron, IL 61010-9794

SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF NRC LETTER UPHOLDING DISPUTED VIOLATION DOCUMENTED IN EVALUATION OF CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000454/2017009, 05000455/2017009

Dear Mr. Kanavos:

In a letter dated February 8, 2018, to Anne T. Boland, Director of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Office of Enforcement, you requested the NRC review a December 21, 2017, decision by Kenneth G. O'Brien, Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, Region III, to

uphold Non-Cited Violation (NCV)05000454/2017009-01; 05000455/2017009-01, which Exelon

had disputed. After reviewing that decision, and your February 8, 2018, letter, and after

coordination with the Director of the Office of Enforcement, I have decided to accept your

request for review. To be clear, our process does not provide for multiple appeals of the Region's determination. Rather, under the specific facts of this case, I interpret your request instead as Exelon's initial appeal of the specific and substantive modifications to the NCV

reflected in Region III's December 21 decision.

Consideration of this appeal is warranted in this case because the June 29, 2017, inspection report that documented the NCV (Byron Station Units 1 and 2-Evaluations of Changes Tests, and Experiments Baseline Inspection Report 05000454/2017009; 05000455/2017009) did not

fully articulate the basis for the violation. Region III acknowledged this limitation in its

December 21, 2017, letter, noting that the initially-documented NCV, "included an explanatory

statement that was open to interpretation," and provided additional information to justify the NCV.

The additional information and analysis relied upon by Region III to uphold the NCV was not

previously provided to Exelon in writing. In turn, Exelon's February 8 appeal asserts detailed new arguments and information that Region III could not have reasonably expected Exelon to have raised earlier, given how the NCV was first documented. Accordingly, I have determined the unusual facts and circumstances of this particular case warrant consideration as an initial appeal of Region III's December 21 decision. Consistent with

that approach, the review will be conducted by an independent panel, which will consider all relevant information provided on this matter to date. The panel's final determination will rely in

M. Kanavos - 2 -

part upon input from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation regarding the proper application of the NRC-approved Surveillance Frequency Control Program at Byron Station.

This letter will be made available electronically for public inspection and copying from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) available at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and in the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 2.390, "Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding."

Sincerely,

/RA/

K. Steven West Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 License Nos. NPF-37; NPF-66 cc: Distribution via LISTSERV

ML18100A222 OFC RIII/ORA OE OGC RIII/ORA NAME JHeck:jc ABoland1 Moulding2 KSWest DATE 4/2/18 04/05/18 4/2/18 04/09/18