ML20247B877
| ML20247B877 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1989 |
| From: | Warnick R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247B840 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-445-89-38, NUDOCS 8909130171 | |
| Download: ML20247B877 (3) | |
Text
,.
1 2
jp APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION TU Electric Dockets:
50-445/89-38 Domanche Peak Steam Electric Station Permits:
CPPR-126 Unit 1, Glen.Rese, Texas During an NRC inspection conducted on July 17 through July 27, 1989, violations of NRC requirements were identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement
- Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1989), the violations are listed below
A.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, criterion IX requires that special processes such as nondestructive testing be accomplished using.
qualified procedures in accordance with applicable codes.
Comanche Peak's3DSAR and site ultrasonic procedure ISI-206, Revision 3, state that preservice' examinations will be performed in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel Code Section XI, 1980 edition.
ASME Section XI, paragraph lWA2232 requires for the examination of welds that
" reflectors'that produce a response greater than 50% of reference level shall be recorded."
i Contrary to the above, a review of site procedure ISI-206, Revision 0, disclosed that the procedure has a less stringent i
recording requirement than that required by ASME Section.XI.
Furthermore,'an NRC ultrasonic examination of weld TBX-2-2523, Number 7, an ASME Class 2 weld in the safety injection system, identified an ultrasonic. reflector.that produced a response greater than 50% of DAC, and as a* consequence of the inadequate procedure, this reflector had not been recorded nor dispositioned in accordance with ASME.Section XI requirements.
This is a Severity Level IV violation. (Supplement II)
(445/8938-V-04).
B.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, criterion XVI requires that deficiencies be promptly identified and corrected.
Contrary to the above, the applicant did not correct deficiencies identified in the fabrication of containment electrical penetration welds.
On October 25, 1988, the applicant identified in Deficiency Report DRC-88-02376 that the l
j
)
8909130171 890908 PDR ADOCK 05000445 Q-PDC
f L.,.-,
2 77 electrical penetration weldments were not radiographically examined per commitments in their FSAR and the applicable construction specification (2323-SS-19).
Subsequently, the applicant inappropriately accepted these welds without the required volumetric examination.
Their basis for acceptance of the welds relied on stress analyses that are not technically acceptable substitutes for.the required nondestructive examinations.
This is a Severity Level IV violation.
(Supplement II)
(445/8938-V-06).
C.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI requires that deficiencies are promptly identified and corrected.
Contrary to the above, the applicant did not correct deficiencies identified in the fabrication of fuel transfer tube penetration welds.
Fuel transfer tube penetration welds 1 A, 1B, 2A, and 2B were radiographer and rejected on June 3, 1989, because of welding defects not acceptable by the applicable construction codes and specifications.
The nonconforming conditions were documented by the applicant in NCR 89-04023 dated April 4, 1989.
On June 20, 1989, site
. engineering inappropriately dispositioned NCR 89-04023, Revision 1, " accept-as-is."
The applicant's basis for acceptance of the welds relied on stress analyses that are not technically acenptable substitutes for the required ASME III nondestructive examinations.
This is a Severity Level IV violation.
(Supplement II)
(445/8938-V-05).
Pursuant'to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, TU Electric is hereby I
required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, DC, 20555, with a copy to the Assistant Director for Inspection Programs, Comanche Peak Project Division, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, within 30 days of the date of the 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.
If an adequate reply is not received *.dthin 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 l
__________-__a
m,
< rj f.
,(-
i W"
..,%+
s
~ W ' ;i'y l L 's n.,, -
7p j_-l, i (-
,.. f _
.l.:1[
- . ' u i..
~
'3-Q'
//
may-be: properi shbuld.not: be taken.. Where good cause.'is : shown,-
. consideration will belgiven'to. extending the response' time..
M~J r
FOR THE-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
Y':
f[k)&
1'
-Dated at Comanche'. Peak.. Site g.
._;c
, this.:- 8th day of t September 1989 7
'Ll
.i.
r,,
s l-'.
fi i
I.
f.I 1
01:
r
((.
f.
[:,
i-(;.-
?
i 1
i.
.