ML20126C081

Notice of Violation from Insp on 9211102-1214.Violation Noted:As of 921120,inappropriate Equation Was Used to Evaluate Design Basis Capability of safety-related MOVs

ML20126C081
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	12/16/1992
From:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20126C076	List: ML20126C074 ML20126C081 ML20126C084
References
50-373-92-23, 50-374-92-23, NUDOCS 9212220345
Download: ML20126C081 (2)

Text

_-.---_-.----- - - _ ---. -

_ - _ ~ _ . - - - . ~ _ _ - -

t NOTICE Of VIOLATION -

Commonwealth Edison Company Doc.et Nos. 50-373; 50-374 LaSalle County Nuclear Station Licenses No. NPP-11; No. NPF-18 Unitu 1 and During an NRC inspection conducted on November 2 through 20, and .

December 1, 1992, two violations of t'dC requirements were

~

identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are described below:

A. 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, CriterJon III requires, in part, that meuouros cha21 be established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and the design basis, as defined in ,

10 CFR 50.2, are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions. These measures shall include provisions to assure that appropriate quality standards are specified and included in the design documents and that deviations from such standards are controlled.

Contrary to the above, as of November-20, 1992, an inappropriate equation (Linitorque's " stall torque" equation) was used to evaluate the design basis capability of safety-related MOVc. Appropriate technical justification for deviating from the vendor's recommendations was not '

presented (373/92023-01; 374/92023-01).

This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement I).

B. 10 CFR 50.9 requires, in part, that information provided to the Commission by a licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material aspects.

Contrary to the above, the licensee provided incompleta and inaccurate information to the Commission during a meeting on November 18, 1992, by presenting a copy of a telephone conversation record dated February 6, 1991, between Bechtel and the vendor (Limitorque). The record was represented by the licensee as Limitorque's position and as justification for the licensee's use of the stall torque equation. This ,

information was incomplete and inaccurate in that the licensee had prior knowledge that use of the stall torque equation for the purpose intended by the licensee was not Limitorque's position. In addition, the record directly conflicted with information previously issued by Limitorque and discussed with. Ceco technical representatives (373/92023-02; 374/92023-02). '

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

i 9212220345 921216 SE l-PDR ADOCK 05000373: '

O PDR

. _ _ __ - _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - . ~ . , _ _. _ _ _ _ u u, , _ . - . . .

110tice of Violation 2 Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Commonwealth Edison Company is hereby required to nubmit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. !1uclear Regulatory Commission, ATT!1:

Document Control Desk, Washington D.C. 20555 with a copy to the U. S. fluclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, 799 Roosevelt Road, G3en Ellyn, Illinois, 60137, and a copy to the 11RC Resident Inspector ut the LaSalle facility within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this tiotice of Violation (11oti ce) . This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a 11otice of Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or if contented, the basic for disputing the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the resulta achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be takun to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. 11 an adequate reply la not received within the time specified in thic 110tice, an order or a demand for information mey be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why cuch 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 glen Elly thin

, Illinois

/d[/' day of gffMp 1992

//I fk L%

H. J.()dller, Director Division of Reactor Safcty m-.e . . .