ML20042C362
| ML20042C362 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 03/15/1982 |
| From: | Norelius C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042C361 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-81-44, NUDOCS 8203310286 | |
| Download: ML20042C362 (2) | |
Text
'
Appendix NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket No. 50-373 As a result of the inspection conducted on December 22-23, 29-30, 1981; and January 7, 14, 27-29, 1982, and in accordance with the Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR.66754 (October 7, 1980), the following violatior, was identified:
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, states, in part that, " measures shall be established to assure that applicable... design basis...for those struc-tures, systems, and components...are correctly translated into... drawings..."
Commonwealth Edison Company Topical Report CE-1-A, " Quality Assurance Program for Nuclear Generating Stations," Revision 15, dated January 2, 1981, states in Section 3, "The fundamental vehicle for design control involves multi-level review and/or evaluation of design documents by individuals or groups other than the original designer or designer's immediate supervisor whose authority and responsibility are identified and controlled by written procedures." "These design evaluations or reviews are conducted to written procedures and include consideration of quality standards, quality assurance requirements, materials suitability, process suitability, interface control and suitability of analytical or testing requirements as appropriate.", and
" Responsibility for overall design and design control of mechanical, elec-trical, structural and nuclear related systems and components and compliance of responsibilities to Section III of the ASME Code is assigned to Project Engineering during the initial design and construction and to the Station Nuclear Engineering Department after plant start-up.
Quality Assurance shall assure that design control requirements are fulfilled through review and audit."
Contrary to the above, the licensee's control over the A-E's suspension system design, including the proper selection of required snubbers, was inadequate in that rigid restraints were installed in close proximity with mechanical snubbers. The snubbers were made inoperable by restricting the minimum snubber _ travel required to initiation unit lock-up. Restricting.
the snubbers travel could cause an increase in the design-loads at the affected rigid restraints.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement II).
8203310286 820315 PDR ADOCK 05000373 G
PDR m
o-
-Appendix 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 tha results achieved; (2) corrective 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 r
Act of 1954, as amended,_this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation. Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
h!AR 15 Dez Dated C. E. Norelius, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Programs t