ML20127A640

Notice of Violation from Insp on 921126-1228.Violation Noted:Incorrect Fuse Removed During Performance of LaSalle Electrical Surveillance (LES)-PC-101

ML20127A640
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	01/05/1993
From:	Clayton H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20127A626	List: IR 05000373/1992028 ML20127A623 ML20127A640
References
50-373-92-28, 50-374-92-28, NUDOCS 9301120029
Download: ML20127A640 (2)

Text

- - .- - . . . - .

l .

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket Nos. 50-373; 50-374 LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 License Nos. NPF-11; NPF-18 During an NRC inspection conducted on November 26 though December 28, 1992, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the

" General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement: Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1992), the violations are listed below:

1. LaSalle Technical Specification 6.2. A.1 requires, in part, that detailed written procedures covering items in Regulatory Guide 1.33, Appendix A, Ravision 2, be prepared, approved, and adhered to. Regulatory Guide 1.33 lists procedures for the plant fire protection program, the operation of the reactor protection system and surveillance procedures.

Contrary to the above, procedures for the plant fire protection program, the operation of the reactor protection system and the conduct of an electrical system surveillance were not adhered to in-the following examples:

a. On November 2, 1992, with the fire detection instrumentation out-of-service, the hourly fire watch for zone 1-15 was not performed in accordance with LaSalle Post Order (LP0) 112, " Roving Fire Watch Patrol", NORMAL DUTIES step 2 at 6 a.m. and 7 a.m..

b. On December 1, 1992, a nuclear station operator (NS0) failed to cycle the correct feed breaker to engineered safety features bus 141Y in accordance with LaSalle Electrical Surveillance (LES)-GM-103, " Inspection of 4.16kV and 6.9kV I.T.E. Circuit Breakers,"

attachment A, step 32.e.

c. On December 3,1992, an NSO failed to close containment isolation valves 1RF012 and 1RE024 in accordance with LaSalle Operating Procedure (LOP)-RP-04, " Reactor Protection System Bus B Transfer",

l steps F 7.f.4 and 5.

l d. On December 5, 1992, an incorrect fuse was removed during the performance of LaSalle Electrical Surveillance (LES)-PC-101, " Unit 1 Group 1 Isolation Logic System Functional Test", step F.8.

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

t

2. -10 CFR 50, Appendix B,Section V requires, in part, that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions of a type appropriate to the circumstances.

Contrary to the above, during February 1992, the work package (WR L13363) to reassemble the low pressure core injection "A" full flow test valve (2E12-F024A) did not include instructions to ensure the gear box was full of grease as required by LaSalle Maintenance Procedure (LMP)-

CM-37, "Limitorque Operator Maintenance (SMB-3) step F.33.3.

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

9301120029'930105 ADOCK 05000373

.PDR O PDR

flotice of Violation 2 l 1

l With respect to item I, the inspection showed that actions had been taken to correct the identified violation and to prevent. recurrence. Consequently no reply to the violation is required and we have no further questions regarding this matter. With respect to item 2, pursuant to the provisions-of 10-CFR  !

2.201, Commonwealth Edison is hereby required to-submit a written statement or-explanation to the U.S. fluclear Regulatory Commission, ATTil: Document Control-Desk, Washington D.C. 20555, with a copy to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region 111, 799 Roosevelt Road, Glen Ellyn, Illinois,:60137, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the LaSalle County' Station within 30 days of the date of the 1: tter transmitting this Notice of Violation (flotice).

This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation " and i should include for each violdtion: (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 wrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an ad.'quate reply-is not received within:the time specified in this flotice, an order ar a demand for information may be -

issued as to why the license should not ts modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper shou W not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Dated at Glen Ellyn, Illinois /kI[

fi~lfrinRTd[on,Gief this J day of January,1993 Reactor h ojects Branch 1 l

l I

I i

l l

.,_ _ . ,_ _ . - __ , _ _ .