ML20046B798

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Violation from Insp on 930510-0611.Violation Noted:Licensee Design Control Measures Did Not Assure Accuracy of Design Calculation,Equipment Qualifications & FSAR Design Info
ML20046B798
Person / Time
Site: Vogtle  Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 07/23/1993
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20046B796 List:
References
50-424-93-11, 50-425-93-11, NUDOCS 9308060225
Download: ML20046B798 (3)


Text

..

s ENCLOSURE 1 I

NOTICE OF VIOLATION P

Georgia Power Company Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 Vogtle 1 and 2 License Nos.: NPF-68 and NPF-81 During an NRC inspection conducted on May 10 - June 11, 1993, violations of NRC requirements were identified.

In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," the violations are listed below:

A.

10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion III, requires design control measures which assure that regulatory documents and the design basis are properly translated into drawings, specifications, instructions, and plrocedures.

l t

Contrary to the above, in the following examples the licensed's design control measures did not assure the accuracy of design calculations, equipment qualifications, and FSAR design information. These documents l

provide data and information that is used in translating regulatory documents and the design basis into drawings, specifications',

instructions, and procedures:

(1)

Calculations X3CH03, X3CK05, and X3CK05-A incorrectly' assumed negligible lengths of control _ cable to the auxiliary relays for operation of Nuclear Service Cooling Water Bypass and Spray valves. Actually, the cables were several thousand feet in length. As a consequence of the incorrect assumptions in the calculations, relays would not be assured to receive sufficient voltage to operate at degraded grid conditions.

(2)

Calculations, such as Diesel Generator Steady State Load Study X3CE01, incorrectly assumed that the safety related Containment Spray (CS), Residual Heat Removal (RHR), and Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) pump motors would not exceed their nameplate horsepower ratings during design accident scenarios. Additionally, for the above three pump motors plus the Centrifugal Charging pump motor, environmental qualification (EQ) records in the EQ file did not support qualified motor lives that considered the maximum design accident of the pumps, as required by 10 CFR 50.49.

(3)

EQ file cable reports (AWV-06-80, AWV-02-8, and the EQ Report for Instrument and Speciality Cable) for cable used for Class lE applications inside the containment did not reflect the correct containment maximum design basis accident temperature'and did not adequately support qualification for the accident temperature stated.

The required environmental qualification temperature was specified at 352 degrees F in Calculation X3AJ01, but the cable had only been tested to 346 degrees F.

9308060225 930723 gDR ADOCK 05000424 PDR

1

.I Georgia Power Company 2

Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 Vogtle License Nos.: NPF-68 and NPF-81 (4)

A 352 degrees F maximum containment temperature profile was given in FSAR Figure 6.2.1-33.

However, the licensee had information (letter GP-14580 dated August 18,1989) indicating a different profile was applicable.

This information indicated a lower maximum containment temperature of 303 degrees F.

(5)

FSAR Section 8.3.1.1.8 incorrectly indicated that the maximum horsepower required by the driven load under normal running or runout conditions would be the nameplate horsepower for all motors rated above 480 V, except the Centrifugal Charging pump motor. As noted in (2) above, this was incorrect for the CS, RHR, and AFW pump motors.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).

B.

10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion XI, as implemented by FSAR Section 17.2.11, requires establishment of a test program which assures that tests are performed to demonstrate that systems and components are operable and that the results of the tests are documented and evaluated.

Contrary to the above, the licensee's test program did not assure the performance of a test and documentation of the test results to demonstrate that the replacement for a failed circuit breaker returned the involved system to full operability. When a failed Post LOCA Cavity i

Purge Fan breaker, 1-ABE-29-2, was replaced on December 20, 1991, the only documented test did not demonstrate that the replacement returned the system to service, permitting the fan to operate. Subsequently, Maintenance Work Request 19105873 (December 23,1991), identified that i

the purge fan associated with the replaced breaker would not start because the breaker repeatedly tripped on fan start.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Sapplement 1).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Georgia 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 a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at Vogtle Nuclear Plant, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be t

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 i

further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved.

l

Georgia Power Company 3

Decket hos.: 50-424 and 50-425 Vogtle License Nos.: NPF-68 and NPF-81 If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or 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.

Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 23rd day of July 1993 I

l