ML20129A171
| ML20129A171 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1985 |
| From: | Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129A170 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-346-85-09, 50-346-85-9, NUDOCS 8506040489 | |
| Download: ML20129A171 (2) | |
Text
._-
es-Appendix NOTICE OF VIOLATION t
Toledo Edison Company Docket No. 50-346' As a result of the inspection conducted on April 8-26, 1985, and in accordance with the General Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Action,~(10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C), the following violations were identified:
1.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by the Toledo Edison Quality Assurance Manual, Section 17.2.5, required the licensee to prescribe activities affecting quality by documented procedures and to accomplish these activities in accordance with these procedures.
PT 5131.02, " Verification of Computer Calculations," states, "The frequency for performing this test shall be monthly at the beginning of a fuel cycle until the computer has been verified to consistently perform satisfactorily."
Contrary to the above, f rom the beginning of Fuel Cycle 5, which commenced January 15, 1985, through March 21, 1985, the licensee did not perform FT 5131.02 to ver.ify, by hand calculations, the computer calculations of thermal power.
(346/85009-03(DRS))
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XI, as implemented by the Toledo Edison quality Assurance Manual, Section 17.2.11, required that test results be documented and evaluated to assure that test requirements have been satisfied.
Contrary to the above, the licensee performed inadequate results evaluations of startup tests in that,the following examples of errors were identified:
a.
In Surveillance Test ST 5010.02, " Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," the licensee made a mistake in th'e calculation of reactivity change for the second measurement of the temperature coefficient.
Further, in the same calculation, the licensee also utilized an incorrect value for xenon reactivity from the data. table.
The safety significance of the error'was minor.
(346/85009-01c(DRS))
b.
In Surveillance Test ST 5010.03. Enclosure 9, "Deboration to Zero Rod Index," the licensee made an error in the calculation of the integral regulating roc worth for the Grouc 7 rods.
Tne safety significance of the error was minor.
(346/85009-01a(DRS))
8506040489 850528
{DR ADOCK 05000346 PDR
l Appendix 2
c.
In Surveillance Test ST 5010.03, Enclosure 11, " Ejected Rod Worth Measurement," the licensee made an error in the calculation of ejected rod worth.
The' safety significance of the error was minor.
(346/85009-01b(DRS))
d.
In Procedure PT 5175.02, " Core Power Distribution," the licensee incorrectly calculated the limit for the enthalpy rise hot channel factor.
The safety significance of the error was minor.
(346/85009-01d(DRS))
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
With respect to Item 2, the inspection showed that action had been taken to correct the identified item of noncompliance.and to prevent recurrence.
Consequently, no reply to this item of noncompliance is required and we have no further questions regarding this matter.
With respect to Item 1, pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, you are required to submit to this office within thirty days of the date of this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each item of noncompliance:
(1) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
<?- Af f5
/$22n w k Dated R. L. Spessard, Director Division of Reactor Safety