ML20203H933

Notice of Violation from Insp on 851209-13

ML20203H933
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/28/1986
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML20203H930	List: ML20203H926 ML20203H933 ML20203H940 ML20203H948
References
REF-QA-99900225 NUDOCS 8604300051
Download: ML20203H933 (2)

Text

- . . . . .. . _ _ . ..

4,

=. .

APPENDIX A The Foxboro Company Docket No. 99900225/85-01 NOTICE OF VIOLATION As a' result of the inspection conducted on December 9-13, 1985, and in accordance with Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and its implementing i regulation 10 CFR Part 21, the following violations were identified and cate-gorized in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C),

49 FR 8583 (March 84, 1984)-

l A. Section 21.21 of 10 CFR Part 21, states, in part:

"...(a) Each individual, corporation, partnership or other entity subject- l to the regulations in this part shall adopt appropriate procedures to: 1 (1) Provide for: (i) Evaluating deviations or (ii) informing the licensee or purchaser of the deviation in order that the licensee or purchaser may cause the deviation to be evaluated...(b)(1) A director or responsible officer subject to the regulations of this part or a designated person shall notify the Commission when he obtains information reasonably indicating a failure to comply or a defect affecting (i) the construction ' i or operation of a facility...or (ii) a basic component that is within his organization's responsibility and is supplied for a facility...within the United States that is subject to the licensing requirements...."

Contrary to the above, The Foxboro Company (TFC) failed to notify the Commission of a 1978 problem at San Onofre #1, which reasonably indicated that a defect existed in Foxboro's "E-line" electronic controllers.

Additionally, The Foxboro Company failed to perform a 10 CFR Part 21 reportability evaluation until September 18, 1985, or to notify its nuclear plant customers so they could cause the problem to be evaluated.

The problem concerned the degradation of electrical conductor insulation on several "E-line" controllers (85-01-01).

This .is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement VII).

B. Section 21.21 of 10 CFR Part 21, states.in part: "Each ... co'rporation

... or other entity subject to the regulation in this part shall adopt appropriate procedures to: (1) Provide for: (i) evaluating deviations or l (ii) informing the licensee or purchaser of the deviation in order.that l the licensee'or purchaser may cause the deviation to be evaluated .... " ]

Contrary to the above, the procedure adopted by TFC is not adequately '

providing for 10 CFR Part 21 reportability evaluations, or transmittal .of-the information to the licensee. -This was evidenced by the lack of-reportability evaluations or licensee transmittal . letters for the following TFC failure analysis reports (85-01-02):

~

99900225 H l

m

t.

t t'

a. TFC Report No. 1984-CFA-08, " Leaking and Corrosion of Electrolytic i Capacitors."

b. TFC Report No. 1985-CFA-051, " Transistor, diode, and relay failures in UCM power supplies."

c. TFC Highland Problem Log #11364 & 11365, dated 7/22/85, " Failure of PWA drive cards - generic implications," (Peach Bottom) (Deleted .

from Log book and transmitted to TFC'Lasalle, Canada facility).

i

d. TFC Highland Problem Log #1102/1103/1104, dated 11/16/84, "2A0VAI power supply outputs intermittent," (Northeast Utilities),

e. TFC Highland Problem Log #4112, dated 4/12/82, " Power Supply Fuses,"

(Pilgrim).

f. TFC Highland Problem Log.#5169, dated 5/31/82, "62-H Electronic Controllers - erratic outputs - end of life," (Generic).

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VII). i i

. ---___-_-__:_-_-. . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - .