ML20052D135
| ML20052D135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1982 |
| From: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052D130 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-82-04, 50-309-82-4, NUDOCS 8205060301 | |
| Download: ML20052D135 (2) | |
Text
.
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Meine Yankee Atomic Power Company Docket No. 50-309 Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station License No. DPR-36 As_a result of the inspection conducted on March 9 - 12, 1982 and in accord-ance with_the NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C), 47 FR 9887 (March 9, 1982), the following violations were identified:
A.
Criterion III, Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, requires measures to be established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and design bases for those structures, systems, and components to which Appendix B applies are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures and instructions. The licensee's Quality Assurance Procedure 0-01-1, Rev.
No. 1, Section 4.5, requires the Plant Engineering Department to review design change request documents to verify the adequacy of the design.
Contrary to the above, on March 10, 1982, inadequate design or document review was evident in the following cases:
An approved engineering drawing, No. 11550-FE-3DM, was incorrect in that the drawing required the wiring of a logic circuit associated with Engineering and Design Change Request (EDCR) 82-7 in a manner such that the logic circuit would not function properly.
Further, additional drawings associated with EDCR 82-7 were required to be revised to reflect the correct as built condition of the circuitry.
Approved engineering drawings / instructions associated with the High Range Radiation Monitors installed per EDCR 80-03 did rat accurately indicate the installation of the High Range Radiation Detectors.
Further, the drawings / instructions did not correctly indicate the installed wiring location from the detectors to the containment penetration and auxiliary logic cabinets.
This is a Severity Level V viola; ion - (Supplement I) applicable to DPR-36.
B.
Criterion V, Appendix B, 10 CFR 50,-requires activities affecting'-
quality to be prescribed by and accomplished in accordance with documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type' appropriate to the
' circumstances.
The licensee's Quality Assurance Procedure No. 0 03, Rev. No._0, Section 4.8.2, requires an "on duty" Senior Reactor Operator document his authorization to remove equipment from service by signing Maintenance Requests in the appropriate section.
8205060301 820421 C
PDR ADOCK 05000309 C
Appendix A 2
Contrary to the above, on March 10, 1982 an "on duty" Senior Reactor Operator had not documented his authorization to remove equipment from service by signing the Maintenance Request in the appropriate section in two separate instances.
This is a Severity Level V violation - (Supplement I) applicable to DPR-36.
C.
Criterion XI, Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, requires a test program be established to assure that all testing required to demonstrate systems and components will perform satisafactorily in service, is identified and performed in accordance with written test procedures, and that the test procedures include provisions for assuring that all prerequisites for the given test have been met. The licensee's Quality Assurance Procedure No. 0-06-3, Rev. O, Section 4.3 requires preoperational tests be performed when appropriate to verify that a system or component which has been changed satisfies the specified design / functional requirements.
Section 4.5 of the same procedure requires test procedures or instructions to identify prerequisite requirements for system testing.
Contrary to the above, on March 10, 1982 the test procedure associated with the Safety Injection Actuation System (SIAS) Logic Modification performed per EDCR 82-7, did not verify that contacts associated with manual safety injection which were changed as part of the modification would function as required.
Further, the test procedure did not identify all prerequisite requirements for properly testing the system.
This is a Severity Level V violation - (Supplement I) applicable to DPR-36.
D.
Criterion VI, Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, requires measures be established to control the issuance of documents which prescribe all activities affecting quality and that these measures assure that documents are reviewed for adequacy and approved for release by authorized personnel.
The licensee's Technical Specifications, Section 5.8, require the Plant Operational Review Committee (PORC) to review and the Plant Manager to approve test activities of safety-related equipment.
Contrary to the above, on March 10, 1982 the test procedure associated.
with the SIAS Modification performed per EDCR 82-7 was not reviewed by the PORC or approved by the Plant Manager.
This is a Severity Level V violation - (Supplement I) applicable to DPR-36.
APR 2 6 1982-Orisinal signea sy: g g2d Dated Thomas T. Martin, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Programs 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
.