ML20151T139
| ML20151T139 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1986 |
| From: | Harrison J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151T138 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-456-85-48, 50-457-85-47, NUDOCS 8602100137 | |
| Download: ML20151T139 (2) | |
Text
'
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket No. 50-456 Docket No. 50-457 As a result of the inspection conducted on October 9 - November 5, 1985, and in accordance with the " General Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions,"
10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the following violations were identified:
1.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, as implemented by Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) Quality Assurance Manual, Nuclear Generating Stations, Section 3, requires that measures be established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and the design basis are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures and instructions, and that deviations from such standards are controlled.
Contrary to the above, torque switch settings on safety related motor operated valves 1CV8355B, 1518807B and 1518814 were set in the field either below or above the vendor or engineering required set point values.
Also, limit switch rotors number 2 and 4 on valve 1S188078 did not operate when the valve was positioned in the fully closed position.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement II).
2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion X, as implemented by Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) Quality Assurance Manual, Nuclear Generating Stations, Section 10, requires that "a program for inspection of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed..." to verify conformance with the documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing this activity.
Contrary to the above, the following instances of failure to perform adequate inspection were identified:
a.
The Licensee did not adequately implement requirements to inspect, identify, and document safety related butt splices during it's corrective action program established to identify these splices.
b.
The inspection performed on motor operator valve (MOV) 1CV8804A on July 16, 1985, failed to note the type of " SIS" wire that was installed in the limit switch compartment.
Consequently, three internal jumpers of Vulkene " SIS" wiring were observed installed in the valve in lieu of Rockbestos " SIS" wiring as required per disposition of CECO nonconformance report No. 277.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement II).
3.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V as implemented by Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) Quality Assurance Manual, Nuclear Generating Stations,
[ $ 5 $ k$
o
2 Section 5, requires that the activities affecting quality be performed in accordance with documented instructions, procedures, and drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances.
Contrary to the above, wiring diagram 20E-1-4663C, Revisions "J" and "M",
and Revision Work Request (RWR) No. 789, dated October 27, 1981, indicated that the internal connections to relays CRVQ1AX and PSVQ1AX in compartment C-3 of Motor Control Center (MCC) 131X2 was implemented and verified to be completed.
Field inspection by NRC revealed that the same internal connections were determinated and placed in the MCC's wireway.
In addition, a jumper not shown on drawing 20E-1-4663C Revision "M", compartment C3, was found terminated in the field between points 3 and 3A.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement II)
With respect to items 2.a and 2.b, the inspection showed that immediate action had been taken to correct the identified violations and to prevent recurrence.
Consequently, no reply to inese violations are required and we have no further questions regarding this matter.
With respect to items 1 and 3, 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 violation:
(1) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further violations; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
\\1 UAN 2 71986 G C Dated J. J. Harrison, Chief Engineering Branch