ML20151V438

Notice of Violation from Insp on 880229-0310.Violations Noted:Calibr Sheet for 60 Degree Angle Search Units Unsigned & Two Calibr Sheets for 45 Degree Angles Initialed But Not Dtd

ML20151V438
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	04/22/1988
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20151V435	List: ML20151V432 ML20151V438 ML20151V451
References
50-313-88-04, 50-313-88-4, 50-368-88-04, 50-368-88-4, NUDOCS 8805030060
Download: ML20151V438 (2)

Text

.

APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Arkansas Power & Light Company Dockets: 50-313 Arkansas Nuclear One 50-368 Operating Licenses: OPR-51 NPF-6 During an NRC inspection conducted February 29 through March 10, 1988, violations of NRC requirements were identified. The violations involved failure to properly document ultrasonic examination calibrations and failure to enter potential 10 CFR Part 21 items into the required tracking system. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1987), the violations are listed below:

A. Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by and accomplished in accordance with documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances.

Paragraph 8.0 and Appendix 0 of Procedure 1092.021, Attachment I, require that the Level II examiner shall establish the system calibraticq parameters and sign and date the calibration sheet prior to the ultrasonic examination of the reactor vessel welds. The procedure also requires that the calibration checks shall be documented by time, date, and signature.

Contrary to the above, on March 8, 1988, the NRC inspector noted, with respect to automated ultrasonic examination of a reactor vessel weld (Exam No.01-017), that the calibration sheet for the 60' angle seat:h units was unsigned and the two calibration sheets for the 45' angles and the 0* angle search units were initialed but not dated. The calibration was determined to have been performed on March 3,1988, prior to performing the automated ultrasoni: examination of the reactor vessel weld on March 6 and 7, 1988. It was also noted that two of the five calibration checks had not been signed on the examination record for Exam No.01-017 of which one of these was for verification that the initial calibration had been established.

This is a Severity Level V violation. (Supplement I) (368/8804-02)

! B. Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by and accomplished in accordance with documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type

, appropriate to the circumstances.

Paragraph 5.5 of Arkansas Power & Light Company Energy Supply Procedure 304, Revision 3, states, "Upon receipt of the written request for evaluation (either internal or external), the Manager, Nuclear Engineering and Licensing will ensure the possible nuclear saiety or environmental concern will be logged using the Safety Concern 8805030060 800422 PDR O ADOCK 05000313 DCD

t i

2 Form (Form 304F1) and will assign responsibility for resolution. The assigned licensing engineer or technician will ensure the concern is entered into the Licensing Commitment Tracking System (COMTRAC) for tracking and ultimate closecut."

Contrary to the above, only 1 of 17 currently open possible nuclear safety concerns (i.e., potential 10 CFR Part 21 items) was observed on March 4, 1988, to have been entered into the COMTRAC.

This is a Severity Level IV violation. (SupplementI)(313/8804-04; 368/8804-05)

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Arkansas Power & Light Company is hereby required to submit to this office, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice, a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each violation: (1) the reason for the violations if admitted, (2) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Dated at Arlington, Texas, ,

this ShL day of 1988.