IR 07100024/2012004
| ML20196E533 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco, 07100024 |
| Issue date: | 02/10/1988 |
| From: | Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196E508 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-87-37, NUDOCS 8803010151 | |
| Download: ML20196E533 (2) | |
Text
a L
.
.
.
NOTICE OF VIOLATION-Sacramento Municipal Utility District Docket No. 50-312-P. O. Box 15830 License No. DPR-54 During an NRC inspection conducted on October 24 through December 4, 1987 violations of NRC requirements were identified.
In accordance with the
"General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions,"
10.CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are listed below:
A.
Technical Specification 6.8.1, states, in part:
"Written procedures shall.be established, implemented and maintained covering the activities referenced below:
(a) The applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, November 1972..."
Regulatory Guide 1.33, November 1972, Appendix A, Paragraph I.1, states, in part:
"Maintenance which can affect the performance of safety-related equipment should be properly preplanned and perforced in accordance with written procedures, documented instructions, or drawings appropriate to the circumstances..."
l 1.
Maintenance Administrative Procedure, MAP-0002, "Control of
,
'
Maintenance Activities", Paragraph 5.6.4 states, in part:
"The assigned craftsman is responsible for completing all safety related maintenance activities in accordance with approved procedures or written instructions in the sequence written..."
Contrary to the above, on November 11, 1987, Work Request (WR)
139613A, Step 4 was not performed while troubleshooting the refrigeration unit U-545B of the essential HVAC system for the control room / technical support center. The procedure step prohibited component rework from being accomplished within the scope of the troubleshooting work request.
However, the unit was rewired to correct an observed nonconformance identified during the troubleshooting without revising the work request.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
2.
Rancho Seco Quality Assurance Procedure, QAP-17, "Nonconforming Material Control", Paragraph 4.1, states:
"Systems, equipment and appurtenances, components, parts or material which do not meet the specified requirements of purchase orders, design drawings, operational / test documents, or construction documents shall be considered nonconforming.
Refer to Attachment 7.3 for guidelines on when to write NCR".
8803010151 % 2
!
+
PDR ADOCK pog G
--
..
_ --
_
_
__
. - _ _ -
.-.
- _.
.
.,
_.
.
- .
<-
.
l,
'
'.
'
,
,
,.
,
.
-2-
,
,
Attachment 7.3 states, in part:
"Operational:
If a
-
<
-
discrepancy is found between as-built and drawing; an NCR shall be initiated".
-
Contrary to the above, on November 11, 1987 an NCR was not initiated to correct a nonconformance discovered between the~
as-built wiring of the refrigeration unit U5458 of the CR/TSC HVAC system and Drawing Number E-342, Sh.71, Rev. 4, DCN 11A, Sh. 1 & 2.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
Purscant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, The Sacramento Municipal Utility District 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 NRC Resident Inspector, Anthony 0'Angelo, within 30 days of the 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 violation if admitted, (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.
If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, autpended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken.
Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION b%
I 0. F. Kirsch', Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects Dated at Walnut Creek, California this /Ot6 day offjj/.1988 e
.. _
__
.