ML20238A379
| ML20238A379 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 09/01/1987 |
| From: | Verrelli D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20238A355 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-87-17, 50-364-87-17, NUDOCS 8709090267 | |
| Download: ML20238A379 (2) | |
Text
.
1 ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Alabama Power Company Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364
)
Farley Units 1 and 2 License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted July 10 through August 18, 1987, a violation of NRC requirements was identified. The violation involved a failure to establish, implement and maintain procedures required by Technical Specification Section 6.8.1 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:
Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires that applicable written procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.33, Revision 2, 1978 shall be established, implemented and maintained.
The following are examples of this procedural violation.
1.
Amendment No. 62 to the Unit 2 Technical Specification, issued April 10, 1987, deleted Table 3.8-1, Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices, from the Technical Specifications.
Technical Specification Bases Section 3/4.8.3 states that the tabulation of the required containment penetration conductor overcurrent protection devices are contained in plant procedures which are controlled in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.
Contrary to the above, as of July 27, 1987 procedures were not established and implemented for identification of the required containment penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices which are within the scope of Technical Specification Section 3.8.3.1 2.
Procedure FNP-1-STP-33.0B, Solid State Protection System Train B Operability Test, Section 4.5, states that all steps of this test must be completed in the prescribed sequence.
Section 5.7.11 of this procedure requires that the reactor trip breaker and bypass breaker counter numbers be recorded in the reactor trip breaker surveillance test data book under the correct breaker serial number and verify the counter has increased since last data entry. This data entry step is the next sequence following the operator's reading and recording of the cycle counter reading.
Contrary to the above, on July 24, 1987, while performing surveillance 1-STP-33.0B, the operator failed to follow the procedure sequence.
The trip breaker and bypass trip breaker counter numbers were not entered into the surveillance test data book to verify that counter numbers had increased since last data entry until after completion of the procedure, i.e. following procedure step 5.7.16.
G709090267 070901 PDR ADOCK 0500 B
G
e d
Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364
[/
Alabama Power Company 2 ('
Farley Units 1 and 2 License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8 3.
Administrative Procedure No. 52, " Equipment Status Control and Maintenance Authorization", states in section 7.5.9 that proper test and restoration s te p's.
shall be completed prior to functional acceptance of the wo't k request.
Contrary to the abrde, post maintenance testing was inadequate for functional acceptance of Maintenance Work Request (MWR) 111291 dated 7-11-85 in that > a wiring error on 2C diesel generator control circuitry caused the 2C diesel generator to not have non-essential engine protection (NEEP) when aligned to 2B battery.
This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement 1).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Alabama Power Company is hereby required to submit to this Of fice with'a 30 days of the date. of the letter transmitting this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply including (for each violation): (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 violations, and (5) th's date when full compliance will be achieved.
Where good cause i s shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time, FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM!ISSION ORIGINAf " ~ '9 !!y
/
DAVID M. Ymp LJ Dahd M. Verrelli, Cnief Reactor Projects Branch 1 Olvision of Reactor Projects Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 1stday of September 1987 l
_ - _ - _ - _ _