ML20035D324
| ML20035D324 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1993 |
| From: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035D317 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-92-24, 50-301-92-24, NUDOCS 9304130077 | |
| Download: ML20035D324 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _
m
. o i
j i
Wisconsin Electric Power Company Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 l
Point Beach Nuclear Plant Licenses No. DPR-24; No. DPR-27 Units 1 and 2 i
f During an NRC inspection conducted October 13 through November 5,1992, and i
January 11 through February 4, 1993, a violation of NRC requirements was i
identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violation is listed below-10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by Point Beach Quality j
Assurance Program Section 1.8.5, requires that activities affecting quality be i
prescribed by documented instructions or procedures and that those activities be accomplished in accordance with these instructions or procedures. These i
instructions and procedures shall include appropriate acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished.
The following procedures / instructions prescribe activities affecting quality.
f a.
Precedure PBNP 3.1.1, " Independent Verification," revis en 2, paragraph 4.3.5, required safety related electrical wires or wire attachments be independently verified.
I b.
Procedure PBNP 3.4.12, " Housekeeping." Revision 7. paragraph 2.7, required equipment and material stored in plant operating areas be i
4 storcJ in a manner that would not create seismic concerns for important operational equipment, j
c.
Pi ocedure QP 3-1, " Modification Requests," Revision 8, paragraph 3.24.2, required modification packages be reviewed within 90 days l
after the installation was accepted to verify the modification had i
been effectively completed or appropriate approval for a delay be j
obtained.
t d.
Surveillance procedures for annual fire system testing and precedures for monthly and quarterly safety injection system testing.
j 2
Contrary to the above:
a.
On January 29, 1993, procedure IWP-228*C-2 governing installation of modification package MR 84-228*C-2 did not contain instructions to independently verify electrical wires of wire attachments.
b.
On January 29, 1993, gas containers and electrical test equipment in the proximity of important operational equipment in the control l
building cable spreading room were not stored in a manner to prevent seismic concerns.
j 1
i 9304130077 930402 PDR ADOCK 05000266 i
G PDR
- _ _ ~
l c.
On January 29, 1993, modification packages82-104, 84-259, and 86-031 were not reviewed within 90 days and appropriate approvals for delay were not in place.
d.
On January 29,' 1993, the following surveillance test procedures
)
did not contain acceptance criteria:
TS-72 " Annual Fire Pump Capacity Test" l
TS-74 " Annual Underground Fire Main Flow Test" IT-01 "High Head Safety Injection Pumps and Valves (Monthly)"
IT-45, " Safety Injection Valves (Quarterly)"
j lhis is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR'2.201, Wisconsin Electric Power Company is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington D.C. 20555 with a copy to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
l Region III, 799 Roosevelt Road, Glen Ellyn, Illinois, 60137, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice).
This t
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 will be achieved.
If an adaquate reply is not received within the i
time specified in this Notice, an order or a 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, i
I Dated at Glen Ellyn, Illinois
[ [ -[ T k this day of p
, 1993
/7. O. Martin, Acting Director l
Division of Reactor Safety 1
l 1
r'!
-