ML18153C561
| ML18153C561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 02/20/1991 |
| From: | Sinkule M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18153C560 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-90-41, 50-281-90-41, NUDOCS 9103120080 | |
| Download: ML18153C561 (2) | |
Text
ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Virginia El~ctric and Power Co.
Surry docket Nos. 50-280, 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32, DPR-37 During an NRC. inspection conducted on December 30, 1990 - January 26, 1991 a violation of NRC *requirements was identified.
In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actioni," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1990), the violation is listed below:
10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4) requires, in part, that* components* which are classified as ASME Code Class 3 meet the requirements, except design and access provisions ~nd preservice examination requirements, set forth in Section XI of the ASME Boil.er and Pressure Vessel Code~
The licensee's Operation Quality Assurance Program Topical Report, VEP 1-5A, Amendment 5,
- corm1its to meet or exceed the applicable guides and standards described in Regulatory Guide 1.26, Revis.ion 3, which provides standards to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a.
Regulatory Guide_ 1.26 states, in part, that cooling water systems for the control room be classified as ASME Code Class 3.
Contrary to the above, control. room envelope air conditioning system pumps, 1-VS-P-lA, 18, and lC and 1-VS-P-2A, 28, and 2C, were not properly classified as ASME Code Class 3 components, and therefore were not tested i~ accordance with the requirements set forth in Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressu~e Vessel Code.
This is a ~e~erity Level IV violatiori (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Virginia Electric and Power Company 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 if applicable, a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector, within 30 days of the date of the 1 etter tiansmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice).
This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include:
(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 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,
. 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 tri extending the response time.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
2 J
In the maintenance fun~tional area~ examples wh~re p~rsonnel did not follow station administrative procedures when performing maintenance related
- activities were identified as a weakness.. Inspection R~ports 50-280,281/90-07 and 20 have previoOsly identified ~xamples where p~rsonnel w~re not following station ad~inistrative procedures.
The inspectors are concerned that personnel do not always follow station administrative procedures when performing maintenance related activities and consider that this area warrants additional management attenti-0n (paragraph 4.a).
In the engineering/technical support functional area, a weakness was identified involving inadequate attention to detail during the d~sign process of the Unit 1 modification design control package involving the installation of the anticipated transient. without a scram mitigation system actuation circuit (paragraph 4.b).
- ---*-*- ~ -- ---
.