ML20236B377
| ML20236B377 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1987 |
| From: | Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236B376 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-87-14, 50-366-87-14, NUDOCS 8707290095 | |
| Download: ML20236B377 (1) | |
Text
r-l
~
s ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Georgia Power Company Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 Hatch 1 and 2 License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on June 29, to July 2,1987, a violation of NRC requirements was identified.
The violation 1
involved failure to have written procedures to cover Technical Specification.
j i
requirements.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Pro-
{
cedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1986), the violation is listed below:
Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications 6.8.1 requires written procedures for activities referenced in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978.
Paragraph 8.b of Appendix A requires that specific procedures for each surveillance test listed in the Technical Specifications to be written.
Contrary to the above, procedures were not written for the surveillance test required by Unit 1 Technical Specifications 4.6.L.2.(3)(a) and (b) and Unit 2 Technical Specifications 4.7.4.(3)(a) and (b) to inspect j
mechanical snubbers which experienced a severe dynamic event to assure the snubbers have freedom of movement and are not frozen up.
j I
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
l l
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Georgia Power Company is hereby l
required to submit to this Office within 30 days of the date of the letter j
transmitting this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply including-i (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the violation if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further viola-tions, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Where good s
cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
I i
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
gava:8m 8 8e%P M
me l
1 G
Alan R. Herdt, Ch'ief I
Engineering Branch l
Division of Reactor Safety l
r Dated at Atlanta, Georgia l
thisggd day of July 1987 i
I l
I t__-__-------.------_--------_-----------_
J