IR 05000220/1996012

Discusses Insp Rept 50-220/96-12 Conducted Between 961007 & 11 & Forwards NOV & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $50,000

ML20198R420
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	11/05/1997
From:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Sylvia B NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
Shared Package
ML20198R425	List: IR 05000220/1996012 ML20198R439
References
50-220-96-12, EA-97-007, EA-97-7, NUDOCS 9711130271
Download: ML20198R420 (4)

Text

,

>

.

A urg,q k; UNITED STATES -

8- p NUCt. EAR REGULATORY COMMIS810N

~h  !,.

' . REGION I

V 475 ALLENDALE ROAD KING OF PRUSSIA. PENNSYLVANIA 19406A415

• • ..*

November 5,1997 EA 97 007 Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice President, Generation Business Group and Chief Nuclear Officer Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nuclear Learning Center 450 Lake Road Oswego, New Yo.'k 13126 i SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY

- $50,000

'

(NRC Inspection Report No. 50 220/96-12)

Dear Mr. Sylvia:

This letter refers to the NRC inspection of your Maintenance Rule implementation program conducted between October 7 and October 11,1996, at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1. The findings of the inspection were discussed with you and members of your staff during an exit meeting held on October 11,1996. The inspectior. report was sent to you on

.,anuary 15,1997. Based on the inspection, apparent violations of NRC requirements were identified. On February 25,1997, a Predecisional Enforcement Conference (Conference) was conducted with you and members of your staff to discuss the findings of severalinspections including the violations addussed herein, their causes, and your cor.ective actions.

Based on the information developed during the inspection and, after evaluation of the information that you provided during the Conference, the NRC has determined that violations of NRC requiremercs occurred.' These violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) and the circumstances surrounding them are described in detail in the subject inspection report.

The violations set forth in the Notice represent a significant failure to implement key aspects of the Maintenance Rule. These violations, collectively, represent a pregrammatic breakdown

_

in the development and implementation of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's (NMPC's)

program to ensure compilance with the regulatory requirements of the Maintenance Rule.

~

Escalsted eniorcement is warranted due to the significant regulatory concem with the common underlying root causes of the violations. The root causes included a lack of individual-accountebility,- Inadequate management oversight, and insufficient self assessment of Maintenance Rule implementation. :These findings demonstrate that management did not

~

apply sufficient resources to assure adequate implementation of the Maintenance Rule progr:a. These violations are indicative of a programmatic failure to implement key aspects of the Maintenance Rule. Therefore, the violations have been categorized in the aggregate as -

a Severity Level lli problem in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600.

[h/ .d #

.

.;

9711130271 971105 .'

Illsigings!' nlg PDR ADOCK 05000220 j

,

e. lilR[alEsulll lu vt,a ,

'

s- pl u

_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - - _ - - - _ _

.

.

'

.

. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 2 The Commission determined that a maintenance rule was necessary to assure licensees monitor the effectiveness of maintenance to minimize the likelihood of failure of safety-significant equipment that could initiate or edversely affect a transient or accident.- Even though the final rule was issued in July 1991, it did not become effective until July 1996.

During the five year interim period before the rule became effective, the staff and the industry l worked in concert to assure licensees had developed useful guidir.co and clearly understood - '

the manner in which NRC would inspect implemer.tation. This was accomplished through public workshops and a pilot inspection program, the results of which were documented and shared with the industry. -

Notwithstanding the time allotted to implement this program, as wellas the guidance provided -

for establishing a program to meet the Maintenance Rute, your program at Nine Mile Point,

_

Unit 1, was determined to be weak in a number of key aspects. l At the Conference, you acknowledged the program deficiencies and noted that implementation of the Maintenance Rule program did not meet your expectations. You identified inadequate management oversight, ineffective integration of industry insights, and insufficient self assessments as some of the overall causes of the program weaknesses.

In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a base civil penaKy in the amount of $50,000 is considered for a Severity Levellli problem that occurred prior to November,12,1996. Since

_

l Nine Mile Point has been the subject of escalated enforcement actions within the last 2 -

years,' the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for / dent /// cation and Corrective Action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section VI.B.2 of the '

l- Er.forcement Policy for the Severity Level lli problem. Credit is not warranted for / dent /fication >

because the violations were identified by the NRC. Credit is warranted for Corrset/ve Actions because your corrective actions, once the violations _ were identified by the NRC, were -

considered prompt and comprehensive. These actions, which were discussed during your presentation at the Conference, includeJ, but are not limited to: (1) improvement of senior -

management oversight of the Maintenaace Rule program, including establishing a full-time Maintenance Rule Manager (2) administrative control procedure enhancements; (3) plans to

- conduct periodic internal and external assessments of the program; (4) plans to use your Project and Task Management process to improve the program; and (5) plans to benchmark -

the program against plants recognized as leaders in Maintenance Rule implementation.

Therefore, to emphasize the importance of implementation of effective Maintenance Rule programs, as well as adequate management oversight of such programs, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) in the base amount of

$50,000.

.

A $200,000 civil penalty was issued on April 10,1997 (EAs 96 474, -475, -494, and-541) for several Severity Level lli violations; an $80,000 civil penalty was issued on Ju'y 24, 1996 (EA 96-116) for a Severity Level 11 violation; and a ?50,000 civil penalty was issued on June 18,1996 (EA 96-079) for a Severity Level 111 vic!ation.

- _

...

+ . ,

9 -

. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 3

'

l

)

. Additionally, based on further NRC review, the failure to have effective goals and monitoring for the reactor recirculation system and the f ailure to have effective and timely monitoring and 'l trending of maintenance a:tivities were determined not to be violations of NRC requirements.

However, these failures were considered significant weaknesses in your Maintenance Rule program that warrant corrective actions.

.

You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the

,

enclosed Notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part, to l determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with t

reg'!! story requirements, r <

in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of thi NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,its l

-

enclosure, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room 1PDR). l

[ ,-

l

Sincerely,

/

Hubert J. Mr Regional Ad nistrator Docket No. 50-220 License No. DPR-63 Enclosure: Notice of Violation and Proposed imposition of Civil Penalty - '

-

o _

. .

.

,

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 4-cc w/ encl:

~ R. Abbott, Vice President & General Manager - Nuclear C. Terry, Vice President- Safety Assassment and Support

~

J. Conway, Vice President - Nuclear Engineering K. Dahlberg, Vice President - Nuclear Operations D. Wolniske Manager, Licensing J. Warden, New York Consumer Protection Branch G. Wilson, Senior Attorney M. Wetterbahn, Winston and Strawn J. Rettberg, New York State Electric and Gas Corporation P. Eddy, Director, Electric Division, Departmer.t of Public Service, State of New York C. Donaldson, Esquire, Assistant Attorney General, New York Department of Law

' J. Vinquist, MATS, Inc.

F. Valentino, President, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority J. Spath, Program Director, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority I

.

!

T <_ w ='

- -

- _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - -

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation

' plSTRIBUTIOtj:

PUBLIC SECY CA LCallan, EDO AThadani, DEDE JLieberman, OE ,

HMiller, RI FDavis, OGC SCollins, NRR RZimmerman, NRR Enforcement Coordinators RI, Ril, Rill, RIV BBeecher, GPA/PA GCaputo, 01 DBangart, OSP HBell, OlG TMartin, AEOD l OE:EA (2 copies) (Alo by E-Mail)

NUDOCS DScrenci, PAO RI NSheehan, PAO-RI Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

Resident inspector - Nine Mile LTremper, OC

.

i t

, -

o