ML20128D118

Notice of Violation from Insp on 921129-930109.Violation Noted:Corrective Actions Taken in Response to Violations 50-382/8941-02 & 50-382/9201-01 Inadequate,As Evidenced by Listed Examples

ML20128D118
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	02/01/1993
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20128D091	List: IR 05000382/1992027 ML20128D087 ML20128D118
References
50-382-92-27, NUDOCS 9302100053
Download: ML20128D118 (2)

See also: IR 05000382/1989041

Text

_ _. ._. _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _

$ -

.

,-

L-

1

- APPENDlX A

[

! NOTICE OF VIOLATION  ;

!

i _Entergy Operations, Incorporated . Docket No.: .50-382

'- Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit-3 License No.:..N?F-38.

i

! During an NRC inspection-conducted on November 29. 1992, through

January 9, 1993, a violation of NRC' requirements was identified. In

l accordance with:the " Gene al'5tatement of Policy and Procedure for NRC

Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appundix C, the viole. tion is. listed

'

below.:'

l

Criterion XVI of Appendix B-to.10 r.r'R Part.50 and the-licensee's approved-

quality assurance program descrigion, Revision 5

require that measures be

established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are pronptly -

identified and corrected.

I

Contrary to the above,:the' corrective actions taken in_ response to

Violations 50-382/8941-02 and 50-382/9201-01 were inadequate, as evidenced by

,

,

the following examples, respectively:

l A, On December 30, 1992, the inspector noted that. technicians performing a

,

calibration of a broad range. gas monitor in'accordance with _

! Procedure M1-003-504, Revision 3, Broad Ran'ge Gas Detection System -

Channel Functional Test and Calibration HVCIA5510 A or HVCIA5510_B,"

!. verified the position of the valves requiring independent verification

, by one individual watching the other. individual-manipulate the valves,

l in lieu of physically verifying the valve position. The corrective _

-

actions _ taken in . response to Violation 50-382/8941-02 were inadequate in -

-that-Administrative-Procedure UNT-5-010,. Revision 2, " Independent

l- Verification = Program," did not contain details on how independent-

l- verification was to be performed if alternate means, described in-

[ Step 5.2.2, were not used.

e

l Bc ' On Decemberll,.1992, the _ir,spector found that there were four errors-in-

e the document control of the control room drawings. 'On' _ - .

L- . Drawing ~ LOU-1564-G-167, listed in the " Temporary Alteration Affected.

!

'

Drawing List," a temporary alteration tag' number had 'a transcription

error in_its entry. Two-drawings, LOU-1564-G-160:and L00-1564-G-172,

,'

'

had temporary. alteration tags and were listed on the:" Temporary

Alteration Affected Drawing List," although the temporary alterations,.

! 92-0231and 92-007,'had been restored on November 12, 1992,~and-

li - Harch 12,1992, . respectively. Drawing- LOU-1564-G-853.was , listed in the

" Temporary AlterationLAffected Drawing List," with Alteration 92-019,.

although this alteration had been restored on December 1,1992. The-

~

. licensee's' corrective actions taken in response-to Violation 382/9201-01'

were inadequate in that the list of-all affected controlled drawings was a

.

inot updated each time a1 temporary alteraticn was. installed 'or ren:oved.

-

.These two examples constitute a Severity Level IV problem. -(Supplement I)

((382/9227-01) '

i

n 9302100053 930201-

PDR ADGCK 05000382-

G PDR

=

s

w ,,,n .,,,,,....,,v- ,,.m.-_,_, , . , , y..,,,,,..y_y,.r. .,,.,......,,.,,n ,,A., w ,#. .

--%.,,,.,. ,,,.,w4..i,,ysm.,- y., ,, - , , , _ , ,

&

.

s

.

-2-

pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Entergy Operations, Incorporated,

is hereby reouired to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Consission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington 0.C.

20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, and a copy to tne

NRC Resident Inspector, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting

this Notice of Violation (Notice) This reply should be clesrly 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 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 info "ation may be issued as to why the license should not

be modified, suspended, '. revoked, or why such other.ac. tion as may be proper

should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given

to extending'the response time.

Dated at Arlington, Texas,j

this g[ day of [jfeutu 1993

l

l

l

w

.-

4

. .

. -

.