ML20141F864

Notice of Violation from Insp on 970406-0517.Violation Noted:Listed Examples of Inadequate Testing Procedures Were Identified

ML20141F864
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	06/17/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141F845	List: ML20141F842 ML20141F864 ML20141F884
References
50-366-97-03, 50-366-97-3, NUDOCS 9707030200
Download: ML20141F864 (2)

Text

-

T . 1

. i l '

l NOTICE OF VIOLATION Southerr, Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. Docket No. 50-366 Hatch Unit 2 License No. NPF-5 l I During the NRC inspection conducted on April 6.-1997 through May 17,1997, a l l violation of NRC requirements-was identified. In accordance with the " General  !

l Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG 1600, J

l .the violation is listed below: l l \

l 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V states that activities affecting  ;

quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances.

l Hatch Unit 2 Technical Specification 5.4 requires that written procedures i be established, implemented, and maintained covering activities delineated in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.33 Revision 2, February 1978.

RG 1.33, Appendix A. Typical Procedures for Pressurized Water Reactors.

l paragraph 8.b recommends specific written procedures for surveillance l tests and paragraph 9.a recommends general procedures for control of maintenance and modification work.

Administrative Control Procedure 40AC-ENG-003-0S, Design Control, Revision 8 Section 8.2.2, requires, in part, that design packages will be field installed in accordance with the maintenance 3rogram and that procedural requirements for maintenance activities suc1 as functional testing shall apply to the design implementation.

Modification Support Procedure 17MS-MMS-002-05, Design Change Request Processing, Revision 1 Section 7.4.3, recuires, in part, that when developing post-modification tests, consiceration will be given to the need to demonstrate proper functioning of modified equipment and that functional tests that are not described by existing plant procedures shall be performed by a special purpose procedure.

Contrary to the above, the following examples of inadequate testing procedures were identified:

1. Unit 2 Special Purpose Procedure 17SP-032697-PH-1-2S, Design Change Request 95-054 Dynamic Functional Test of the Feed Water Control System. Revision 0. did not demonstrate proper functioning of recently modified equipment in that, on April 22, 1997, an unexpected plant transient occurred due to a Reactor Recirculation System Pump runback. Section 7.4.38 of the procedure was not changed to reflect the modification. As a result. Unit 2 operated for a short period of time in the " Operation Not Allowed Region" of the reactor power-to-flow map.

l Enclosure 1 9707030200 970617 PDR ADOCK 05000321 G PDR ._ ,

J

I*

Notice of Violation 2

2. An activity affecting quality on April 13, 1996, was not prescribed by documented instructions of a type appropriate to the  ;

circumstances. Unit 2 Surveillance Test Procedure  ;

42SV-R43-008-2S, Diesel Generator 2A LOLA/LOSP LSFT, Revision 5, ED 1, did not contain precautions, prerequisites or identify appropriate pretest conditions to prevent an unexpected engineering safety feature actuation during testing.  ;

This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement 1),

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Southern Nuclear Operating  !

Company. Inc. 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 Regional Administrator, Region II, .

I and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector. Hatch Nuclear Plant, 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 should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if j contested, the basis for disputing the violation. (2) the corrective steps l 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 com)liance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docteted 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 Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, sus) ended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be tacen. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Because your res)onse will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possi >1e it should not include any personal privacy, 3roprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR wit 1out i redaction. However, if you fhd it necessary to include such information, you  !

should clearly indicate the s ocific information that you desire not to be placed in the PDR, and provide the legal basis to support your request for withholding the information from the public.

Dated at Atlanta, Georgia

.this 17th day of June 1997 i

Enclosure 1 e

.