ML17326B215
| ML17326B215 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1986 |
| From: | Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17326B214 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-315-86-05, 50-315-86-5, 50-316-86-05, 50-316-86-5, NUDOCS 8604020458 | |
| Download: ML17326B215 (4) | |
Text
NOTICE OF VIOLATION American Electric Power Service Corporation Docket No. 50-315 Docket No. 50-316 As a result of the inspection conducted on February 3 through March 3, 1986, and in accordance with the "General Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the following violations were identified:
10 CFR, Appendix B, Criterion III, as implemented by the D.
C.
Cook Operations guality Assurance Program and its commitment to standard ANSI N45.2.11, "guality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants," requires that designs receive independent verification and that these designs be appropriately documented.
Contrary to the above:
'a ~
The pipe support design shown on hanger Dwg. No. 1-ASI-L-923 for the CVCS Cross-tie Piping (DC-12-2665) had been redesigned by red-lining the drawing.
There was no evidence the piping support redesign had been independently checked or verified.
In addition to this, two lugs could not be installed as designated in the original design because of inadequate clearance.
Lugs of a different size were installed without red-lining the installation drawing to document the change.
Also, there was no evidence that this change received an independent design verification.
This lug installation was later replaced due to material problems using a properly red-lined drawing, but again without an independent design verification.
2.
b.
The replacement of carbon steel components in the steam generator blowdown tanks, completed in 1984 and 1985, were not documented on the tank drawings.
In addition, no records could be located documenting previous modifications made to these tanks.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, as implemented by the D. C.
Cook Operations guality Assurance
- Program, requires that measures be established to ensure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected.
Contrary to the above:
a
~
In April 1982, licensee personnel were aware that the diesel generator (DG) room ventilation damper motors were undersized and seriously degraded.
Condition Report (CR) No. 1-03-83-263 and LER No.83-023, both addressing the damper issue, were written in March 1983.
Modification No. RFC-12-2760, addressing replacement of the damper
- motors, was written in August 1985 and had not been completed at the time of this inspection.
This does not represent prompt corrective action.
PDR ADOCN 05 M R
i 9
4 lt C
Notice of Viol ation
~
~
~
b.
With regard to CR No. 1-03-83-263 and LER No.83-023, the licensee failed to identify the degraded damper motors as the root cause of the Diesel Generator inverter failures until January 11,
- 1985, 18 months after the event.
These actions do not represent prompt identification of the event's basic cause to ensure appropriate corrective action.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
3.
10 CFR 50.59 requires that a safety evaluation be performed for any modification that changes the configuration of the plant as described in the FSAR.
Contrary to the above, the licensee installed Herculite over the supply ventilation damper in the Unit 1 Diesel Generator room without performing the required safety evaluation.
This modification could lead to high temperatures in the room when the generators are running and the subsequent loss of their availability due to these high temperatures.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, you are required to submit to this office within thirty days of the date of this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each violation:
(1) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further violations; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
ated ar ap ie o,
irector Division of Reactor Safety