ML20236H253

Notice of Violation from Safety Insp on 870605-17. Violations Noted:All Three Chlorine Detection Sys Inoperable & Design Changes Re Chlorine Detection Sys Inadequate

ML20236H253
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	07/29/1987
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236H243	List: IR 05000334/1987010 ML20236H253
References
50-334-87-10, EA-87-116, NUDOCS 8708050116
Download: ML20236H253 (2)

Text

1 I

I NOTICE OF VIOLATION l

Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station License No. DRP-66 Unit 1 EA 87-116 ,

l On June 5-17, 1987, a special NRC safety inspection was conducted to review the i circumstances associated with a violation of a technical specification limiting l condition for operation which was identified by the licensee and reported to '

the NRC. During the inspection, an additional violation of NRC requirements l was identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Pro- I cedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1987), the violations are set forth below:

A. Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation 3.3.3.7 requires that whenever the reactor is in Modes 1-4, three indeper. dent chlorine detection systems shall be operable, with their alarm / trip setpoints adjusted to activate at a chlorine concentration of less than or equal to 5 ppm. If no chlorine detection system is operable, Technical Speci-fication LC0 action statement 3.3.3.7.d requires that action be initiated within one hour to maintain operation of the control room emergency ven-tilation system in the recirculation mo& .

Contrary to the above, between September 29, 1980 and May 4, 1987, while the reactor was at various times in Modes 1-4, all three chlorine detec-tion systems were inoperable, and action was not initiated to maintain the control room ventilation system in the recirculation mode. The three chlorine detection systems were inoperable in that they would not have obtained a representative sample of control room intake air because of inleakage of actual control room air into the sampling line from adjacent spaces.

B. Title 10, CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, and the l licensee's Quality Assurance Program, Section 3.1.4, which was approved by I the NRC, requires, in part, that design control measures shall be estab-l lished and shall include provision for verifying or checking the adequacy I

of designs.

Contrary to the above, in 1980, a design change was made to the facility involving the installation of three chlorine detection systems, and the post-installation testing measures for verifying and checking the adequacy of this design were inadequate in that these measures did not lead to identification of a design error. The design error involved inleakage of air from adjacent spaces through openings such as blower motor cooler holes such that the chlorine detectors would not receive a representative sample of control room intake air.

These violations are categorized in the aggregate as a Severity Level IV problem (Supplement I).

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG DUQUESNE LIGHT C0. -

0006.0.0 l 870B050126 870730 '

DR ADGCK 05000334 PDR

Notice of Violetion 2 I

Pursuant to the provision of 10 CFR 2.201, Duquesne Light Company is hereby i required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Deck, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region I, and a copy to the NRC Senior i Resident Inspector within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this l Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Viola- J tion" 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 viola-l tions, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time. 1 If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, I 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. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown, f

I ,

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION William F. Kane, Director Division of Reactor Projects Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this day of Jtdy 1987 l

l 4

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY CP PKG DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. -

0007.0.0 07/29/87 l - - - _ - - _ - - _ - _