IR 07100128/2012002

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Violation from Insp on 771128-1202.Violation Noted:Licensee Did Not Test Addl 10 Snubbers for Each Found Inoperable Per Procedure 2733B,hydraulic Snubber Functional Test,Rev 0,770601
ML20210J545
Person / Time
Site: Millstone, 07100128 Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 01/06/1997
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210J229 List:
References
50-336-77-31, NUDOCS 9708180136
Download: ML20210J545 (1)


Text

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

!

. .

.

License No. DPR-65 APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Based on the results of the NRC inspection conducted on November 28 -

December 2 and December 6-9, 1977, it appears that certain of your acti-vities were not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC Facility License No. OPR-65, as indicated telow. These items are INFRAtTION Technical Specification 4.7.8.1.c states in part: "Ac least once per 18 months during shutdown, a representative sample of at least 10 hydraulic snubbers or at least 10% of all snubbers listed in Table 3.7-1, whichever is less, shall be selected and functinnally tested to verify correct piston movement, lockup and bleed . . . .

For each snubber found inoperable during these functional tests, an additional minimum of 10% of all snubbers or 10 snubbers, whichever is less, shall also be functionally tested, until nn more failures e are found or all snubbers have been functionally tested." ~

Contrary to the above, during the June 1977 outage, the licensee did not test an additional 10 snubbers for each snubber found inoperable per procedure 2733B, Hydraulic Snubber Functional Test, Revision 0, June 1, 197 CFR 50.59 states in part: "The holder of a license . . . may (1) make changes in the facility as described in the safety analysis report . . . without prior Comission approval, unless the proposed change . . . involves . . . an unreviewed safety questio The Technical Review dated November 2,1977, of the Safety Evaluation for the New Fuel Elevator Modification PDCR 2-219-77 conditionaliy approves the modification as not an unreviewed safety question; one of the provisos being, "Both the eledrical and mechanical upper stops shall be tested in the spent fuel inspection position."

Co'ntrc:y to the above, the modified New Fuel Elevator was used to inspect spent fuel on December 8,1977, without first verifying that the modification was not an unreviewed safety question in that the' mechanical upper stop was not teste .

9700180136 780217 PDR ADOcK 05000336'

G PDR l

'

.. - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ - _ - -