ML20141D718

Notice of Violation from Insp on 970318-0425.Violation Noted:Surveillance Test Procedure Failed to Incorporate Acceptance Limits Contained in Applicable Design Documents

ML20141D718
Person / Time
Site:	Duane Arnold
Issue date:	05/09/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141D700	List: IR 05000331/1997007 ML20141D695 ML20141D718 ML20141D737
References
50-331-97-07, 50-331-97-7, NUDOCS 9705200182
Download: ML20141D718 (2)

Text

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

NOTICE OF VIOLATIQd IES Utilities Inc. Oockat No. 50-331 l Duane Arnold Energy Center License No. DPR-49 i l

During an NRC inspection conducted on March 18 through April 25,1997, two violations I of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy

. and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," the violations are listed below:

1. Criterion XI of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, requires, in part, that all testing required to demonstrate that structures, systems, and components will perform satisfactorily in service is identified and performed in accordance with written test procedures which incorporate the requirements and acceptance limits contained in applicable design documents.

Contrary to the above, the inspectors identified that Surveillance Test Procedure i (STP) 45C001-0, " Residual Heat Removal Service Water Operability Test," failed to 1 incorporate the acceptance limits contained in applicable design documents. l Instead, the system was tested in a different configuration than assumed in the i design basis.

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

2. Criterion XVI of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, requires, in part, that measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected and that measures shall assure that the cause of the condition is

, determined and corrective actions taken to preclude repetition.

l' Contrary to the above, 1

l l a. On April 8,1997, the licensee identified that corrective actions taken in response to a violation on October 25,1996, were not adequate to preclude repetition. As a result, incorrect acceptance criteria for emergency service l water temperatures were used from February 9 until April 8,1997.

b. On April 10,1997, the licensee identified that corrective actions taken in response to previous violations regarding control of document change forms (DCFs) were not adequate to preclude repetition. As a result, main steam low pressure instruments were left outside the correct acceptance criteria from March 25 until April 11,1997.

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

4 i

9705200182 970509 PDR ADOCK 05000331

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _G_ PDR

._ _ . _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ~

.q j

3 Notice of Violation  !

4

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Duane Arnold Energy Center is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN

Document Control Desk, Washington D.C. 20555 with a copy to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region 111,801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois

60532-4351, and a copy to the NRC Resident inspector at the Duane Arnold Energy

Center within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation

]

(Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and i

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 stepr that will be taken to avoid further violations, and 4

(4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or

[ include previously docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this

} Notice, an order or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should i

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.

i i

1 l Dated at Lide, Illinois

this 9th day of May 1997  ;

l ]

I 4

(