ML17228A541
| ML17228A541 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1994 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17228A539 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-389-94-08, 50-389-94-8, NUDOCS 9404200056 | |
| Download: ML17228A541 (2) | |
Text
ENCLOSURE 1
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Florida Power
& Light St.
Lucie Docket No.:
50-389 License No.:
NPF-16 During an NRC inspection conducted on March 7-11,
- 1994, a violation of NRC requirements was 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.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by Florida Power and Light (FP&L) Topical guality Report 1-76A, requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions or procedures of a type appropriate to the circumstances, and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions or procedures.
FP&L Administrative Site Procedure ASP-8, Corrective Action, Revision 6, requires that discrepancies that require an engineering evaluation be documented, evaluated and dispositioned using a Nonconformance Report (NCR).
The Note under Paragraph 7.2 of FP&L Administrative Site Procedure ASP 4, Revision 4, states that a Change Review Notice shall not be utilized in lieu of a NCR to correct deviations from design documents.
Contrary to the above, on March 10,
- 1994, NRC identified that a
Nonconformance report had not been initiated to document a damaged pipe and pipe support end piece at pipe support number RC-4300-138.
The damaged pipe and pipe support was repaired using a Change Review Notice which was initiated on March 5, 1994 and approved on March 7, 1994.
The repair work was completed prior to March 10, 1994.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
B.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by FP&L Topical guality Report 1-76A, requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions or procedures of a type appropriate to the circumstances, and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions or procedures.
Contrary to the above, on March 11,
- 1994, NRC identified that the inspection of the Safety Relief Valve (SRV) and Power Operated Relief Valve (PORV) discharge piping and associated pipe supports following the November 24,
- 1992, waterhammer
- event, and the engineering evaluation of the effects of the waterhammer event on the structural integrity of the.
piping, were accomplished without the use of documented instructions or procedures.
Subsequently, functional testing of snubbers completed on March 10, 1994, identified that five snubbers on the SRV and PORV discharge piping had been inoperable since the November 24,
- 1992, waterhammer event.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
9404200056 940408 PDR ADOCK 05000335 Q
Notice of Violation APR 8 l99~
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201; Florida Power and Light is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control
- Desk, Washington, D.C.
20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (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, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation, (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'ill be achieved.
If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be
- taken, Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
Dated at-Atlanta, Georgia this 8th day of April 1994