ML20214V928
| ML20214V928 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/1987 |
| From: | Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214V919 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-370-87-11, NUDOCS 8706150011 | |
| Download: ML20214V928 (1) | |
Text
'.Y ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Duke Power Company Docket No. 50-370
,' McGuire License No. NPF-17 Luring the Nuclear Regulatory Conunission (NRC) inspection conducted on March 16-20, 1987, a violation of NRC requirements was identified.
The
' violation involved failure to perform trending of Reactor Trip Breaker response time testing data.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1986), the violation is listed below:
License Amendment No. 2 to McGuire Unit 2 facility operating license dated A..
May 27, 1983, paragraph 2.c.12.c requires the licensee to implement the reactor trip breaker and reactor trip bypass breaker testing and reporting as described in Table 1, " Periodic Surveillance / Maintenance of Reactor Trip Breakers and Reactor Trip Bypass Breakers."
Table 1, Column 3 delineates the six months surveillance and maintenance requirements for reactor trip and bypass breakers.
Item 1 of Column 3 requires that the s'
data obtained from response time testing of the UV/ breaker shall be trended.
Contrary to the above, on March 16, 1987, UV/ Breaker response time test data was not being trended nor was there any evidence to show that this data has ever been trended.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Duke Power 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 j
(1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the violation if i
admitted, (3) the. corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further l
violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good j
cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION blI
/
07 34>9 kg Alan R. Herdt, Chief G
Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety Dated at Atlanta, Georgia j
this3oday of g;/
1987 l
l l
_