IR 07100021/2011030

Notice of Violation from Insp on 971021-1130.Violation Noted:As of 971125,four Operability Determinations Prepared as Corrective Actions for Testing Nonconformance Documented in Condition Repts Failed to Justify Operability

ML20199F131
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach, 07100021
Issue date:	12/22/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20199F126	List: IR 07100021/2011030 ML20199F122 ML20199F136
References
50-266-97-21, 50-301-97-21, NUDOCS 9802030066
Download: ML20199F131 (2)

Text

___ _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - -

,

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Wisconsin Electric Power Company Docket Nos. 50 266; 50-301 Point Beach Nuclear Plant License Nos. DPR 24; DPR 27 During an NRC inspection conducted from October 21 through November 30,1997, three violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with NUREG 1600, " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions? the violations are listed below: CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XI, " Test Control / requires, in part, that tests be performed, with satisfactory results, to demonstrate that safety related systems will satisfy their design basis function Contrary to the above, as of November 30,1997, satisfactory test results had not been obtained to demonstrate the ability of the safety-related component cooling water system to perform its design basis function This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I). CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, ' Corrective Action," requires, in part, that conditions adverse to quality, such as nonconformances, be promptly identified and correcte Technical Specification 15.3.3C requires, in part, that the safety-related component cooling water system be operable when a unit is made critical or is at powe Between December 1996 and November 25,1997, condition reports96-416, 97-1863,97 3754, and 97 3901 documented nonconformances in the testing and test results for the safety related component cooling water system. Specified corrective actions included performance of operability determinations to justify component cooling water system operability to allow making a unit critical or maintaining a unit at powe Contrary to the above, as of November 25,1997, the four operability determinations prepared as corrective actions for the testing nonconformances documented in condition reports96-416,971863,97 3754, and 97 3901 failed to justify the operability of the safety-related component cooling water system. Units were made critical and/or were maintained at power during this perio This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1). Technical Specification 15.3.6.A.d.2 states that required actions be performed if the containment air lock door interlock mechanism is inopcrable, including: (a) verify an operable door is closed in the affected air lock within one hour, and (b) lock an operable door closed in the affected air lock within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, and (c) verify an operable door is locked and closed in the affected air lock once per 31 day Contrary to the above, between December 28,1996, and February 18,1997, the Unit i upper containment interlock mechanism had been rendered inoperable and the required actions listed above were not performe This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).

9802030066 971222 DR ADOCK 050002 6

--

_ _._____ .. _ . _ _ ..___ _ _ _ _ _ _.. . Notice of Violation . 2

,

l Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Wisconsin Electric is hereby required to submit l

'

a writt3n statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:

Dncoment Control Desk, Washington, D.C, 20555, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region lil, and a copy to the NRC Resident inspector, within 30 days of the i

'

! date of the letter transmitting this Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the

'

vlotation, or if contested, the basis for disputing the violation; (2) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (3) corrective action to be taken to avoid further violations; and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. The response to the third violation should be focused on addressing the failure to use modification control processes when the hatch

. interlock was rendered inoperable. Where good cause is shown, consideration may be given to extending your response time.

Decause your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the

>

extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction, if personal privacy or i 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 my31 specifically identify the portions of your response that

'

you 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 2.790(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 73.2 Dated at Lisle, Illinois,

this 22nd day of December 1997

,

2

t's a ww-.-v :-- w--rw-m+m-w,-w +em-v erw w . ' w.s wr e z- 1 -we m .m, m- s- -3 rv--rw ---w-- r- -

rm- -->*- T- y y - --- g-p-;