ML20032B041
| ML20032B041 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1981 |
| From: | Norelius C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20032B038 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-295-81-22, 50-304-81-18, NUDOCS 8111040318 | |
| Download: ML20032B041 (1) | |
Text
._. _
Appendix A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket No. 50-295 Docket No. 50-304 As a result of the inspection conducted on September 15 and 21-24, 1981, and in accordance with the Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR 66754 (October 7,1980), the following violation was identified:
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III states, in part, " Design changes, including field changes, shall be subject to design control measures com-mensurate with those applied to the original design and be approved by the organization that performed the original design unless the applicant designates another responsible organization."
Quality Procedure No. 3-51, " Design Control for Operations - Plant Modifications" assigns specific responsibilities to the Station Nuc15nr Engineering Manager. Action 11.b. requires the Station Nuclear Engineer-1 ing Manager to, " Provide all test criteria, functional descriptions and engineering information necessary to pre 9are the required test procedures."
Contrary to the above, the Station Nuclear Engineering Department. (SNED) did not provide test criteria necessary to insure that testing of circuits affected by modifications M22-1-80-24 and M22-2-80-24 would be commensurate with that applied to the original design. Further the station staff did not follow the SNED recommendation that the modified circuits be functionally tested.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
i 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 item of noncompliance:
(1) cor-rective action taken and the results achieved; (2) co <ective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Atomic Energy.
Act of 1954, as amended, this response shall be submitted under oath or a f fi rma tion. Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
akie s
~
'Obt 2 ? to81 Dated C. E. Norelius, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Inspection 8111040318 811023 PDR ADOCK 05000295 0
-.