ML20058C548
| ML20058C548 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1993 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058C538 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-298-93-25, NUDOCS 9312020482 | |
| Download: ML20058C548 (2) | |
Text
.
L 4
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Nebraska Public Power District Docket:
50-298 Cooper Nuclear Station License: DPR-46 Brownville, Nebraska During an NRC inspection conducted on August 29 through October 9,
- 1993, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General 3
~
Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are listed below:
A.
Inadeouate Alarm Response Procedure Technical Specification 6.3.2 requires that written procedures and instructions, including applicable check off lists, shall be established, implemented, and maintained for items A
through G.
' Technical.
Specification 6.3.2.B requires that actions be taken to correct specific and foreseen potential or actual malfunctions of safety-related systems or 1
components, including responses to alarms, primary system leaks, and
'i abnormal reactivity changes.
~
Alarm Procedure 2.3.2.22,- Revision 16, "HPCI Turbine Inlet Drain Pot HI Level," for Panel / Window Location 9-3-2/C-2, Section 2.0, Operator Observation and Action, specifies the action to be taken as:
(1) verify open High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) Valve HFCI-A0-53, CON 3 DRAIN l
POT TRAP BYP VLV; (2) check proper operation of steam trap HPCI-TP-57; and (3) if alarm fails to clear, manually drain condensate from line or remove i
HPCI system from service.
Contrary to the above, a written procedure was not established and maintained for an alarm indicatng a malfunction of a safety system in that Alarm Procedure 2.3.2.22, for Panel / Window Location 9-3-2/C-2, Section 2.0, l
did not appropriately specify the operator actions to be taken when the J
alarm was received during HPCI system surveillance testing. When the HPCI system is in operation, the condensate drain and steam trap are isolated l
and cannot be drained or verified to be operating correctly.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (298/93025-01) (Supplement I).
B.
Failure to Initiate Prompt Corrective Action Criterion XVI, to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, requires that measures shall 4
be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations, defective material, and equipment and nonconformances, are promptly identified and corrected.
a Contrary to the above, measures did not assure that a deficiency was promptly corrected in that the licensee became aware.that. Alarm Procedure 2.3.2.22, Revision 16, "HPCI Turbine Inlet Drain Pot HI Level,"
was deficient af ter surveillance testing on September 1,1993, and did not 9312O20482 931123
?
. _ _ _._..,, _ _ _ _ _, _. _,._.- _ _..._,,.._.. _ _. _ _. _. _. _ _...~ _ -____
l:
r f
- 7 i
i promptly correct the oeficient procedure.
On September.29, 1993, during j
surveillance testing. the deficient procedure caused the HPCI turbine to be i
unnecessarily secured.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (298/93025-2) (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, the Nebraska Public Power District
)
is hereby required to submit a written statement' or explanation to the l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice,
.i within 30 days of the-date of the letter transmitting this Notice of I
Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to'a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation:- (1) the reason for the l
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 adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice,.an order or demand for information may
-i 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.
l l
Dated at Arjington, Texas, //
this j y day of f p / w 1993 l
j 1
.-