ML20214K501
| ML20214K501 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1987 |
| From: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214K490 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-87-06, 50-413-87-08, 50-413-87-6, 50-413-87-8, 50-414-87-06, 50-414-87-08, 50-414-87-6, 50-414-87-8, NUDOCS 8705280465 | |
| Download: ML20214K501 (2) | |
Text
. - -
Duke Power Company Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 Catawba Units 1 and 2 License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52 i
i EA 87-57 j
During the Nuclear Regulatory Connission (NRC) inspections conducted on January 30 - February 19, 1987, and February 26 - March 25, 1987, violations.
j 3
of NRC requirements dere identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement i
of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1987), the violations are listed below:
l A.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III. requires that measures b'e established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and the design basis, as defined in 10 CFR Part.50.2 and as specified in the i
license application, for those structures, systems, and components to which this Appendix applies, are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions.
1 Contrary to the above, measures had not been established to assure Uaat regulatory requirements and the design bases were correctly transisted into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions in that:
1.
The containment design drawings did not indicate a means for maintaining the Containment Air Return Subsystem Fans operable during a design basis Loss of Coolant Accident in that measures, such as curbing, were not identified on the drawings for prevention of flooding of the fans. Thus, both fans were placed in a degraded condition.
t 2.
The design drawings for installation of air lines to the Pressurizer Power Operated Relief Valves (PORV) were unclear and did not ensure l
that the two instrument air lines with backup nitrogen capability were
(
connected to the correct PORVs. This resulted in one of two required PORVs not being connected to the backup nitrogen system as required by design.
t This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement I).
B.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, requires, in part, that measures be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected, r
i Contrary to the above, on January 2, 1987, the licensee did not establish measures to assure that conditions adverse to quality were promptly identified and corrected when test data indicated possible fouling of Containment Spray System Heat Exchanger 2A. This infonnation was not j
brought to the attention of appropriate personnel until February 17, 1987.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
C.
Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering the. applicable t
procedures recommended in Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978. Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, states that procedures are required covering the surveillance testing of safety-related equipment, 8705200465 870515 e
i PDR ADOCK 05000413 G
PDR ii - -- - - -. - -.-
-.J-,_.--...-.-
Notice of Violation Contrary to the above, on November 6,1986, operators failed to properly implement surveillance testing procedure PT/1/A/4600/03C in that the vent valve in the normal air supply line was closed at the wrong point in the procedure.
In addition, the procedure was inadequate to establish the test of the PORVs utilizing the nitrogen backup supply in that air trapped between a check valve and the pressurizer PORVs was capable of stroking the PORV more than one complete cycle.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Duke Power Company is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation tc the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk,liashington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector, Catawba Nuclear Station within 30 days of the date of tl.e letter transmitting this 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 if admitted, (2) the corrective steps 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 compliance will be achieved.
Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ORIGINAL SIGNED BY E L ERNST J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator Dated at Atlanta, Georgia j
thich+6 day of May 1987 l}