ML20248M127
| ML20248M127 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 06/05/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248M123 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-98-05, 50-373-98-5, 50-374-98-05, 50-374-98-5, NUDOCS 9806150038 | |
| Download: ML20248M127 (3) | |
Text
.
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket Nos. 50-373; 50-374 l
LaSalle County Station License Nos. NPF-11; NPF-18 During an NRC inspection conducted on March 19,1998, through April 21,1998, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violations are listed below:
1.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, " Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings," requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented inst,uctions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings.
Contrary to the above, as of April 21,1998, the licensee failed to adequately perform combustible loading calculations required by LaSalle Administrative Procedure 240-6,
" Temporary Alterations," Revision 36, dated August 21,1997, associated with temporary alterations 2-0030-97 and 1-0122-97 on August 12,1997, and September 26,1997, respectively. As a result, the licensee failed to identify that the approved fire protection program may have been adversely impacted. (50-373/98005-03; 50-374/98005-03)
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
2.
10 CFR 50.59(b)(2) requires that licensees submit a report containing a brief description of any changes, tests, and experiments, including a summary of the safety evaluation of each. The report may be submitted annually or along with the Final Safety Analysis Report updates as required by 50.71(e), or at such shorter intervals as may be specified in the license.
Contrary to the above, on February 28,1998, the licensee submitted a 10 CFR 50.59 report to the NRC which was incomplete and failed to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59(b)(2). Specifically, on August 12,1997, LaSalle Special Procedure (LLP)97-031, l
"Use of Main Condenser as a Decay Heat Removal Method in Cold Shutdown,"
Revision 0, a procedure which constituted a test or experiment to the facility, was developed and implemented to allow the use of the main condenser as a decay heat removal method for shutdown risk purposes. This procedure was not described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report and was required to be included in the annual 10 CFR 50.59 report submitted to the NRC. However, the 10 CFR 50.59 report stated that l
during the reporting period of January 1,1997, through December 31,1997, there were no tests or experiments conducted that were not described in the Final Safety Analysis L
Report. (50-373/98005-08; 50-374/98005-08)
L i
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
l 9906150038 990605 PDR ADOCK 05000373 G
PDR 7
4
3.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, " Corrective Actions," requires that measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, j
malfunctions, deficiencies, and nonconformances are promptly identified and corrected.
j in the case of significant conditions adverse to quality, the measures shall assure that the cause of the condition is determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition.
a.
Contery to the above, on March 27,1998, the NRC identified that an unauthorized plant design change to the Unit 0,1 A and 2A diesel generator air
{
box drains that had previously identified by the NRC on June 19,1997, had not been corrected. (50-373/98005-04; 50-374/98005-04)
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
b.
Contrary to the above, on March 27,1998, the NRC identified that the licensee had failed to update the station fuse list since April 1994. As a result, several hundred deficiency reports regarding safety-related and nonsafety-related fuse discrepancies had not been evaluated. (50-373/98005-12; 50-374/98005-12)
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).
c.
Contrary to the above, on March 27,1998, the NRC identified that an important to safety designated Klockner-Moeller (K-M) relay located in Motor Control Conter 132Y-2, cubicle B1, had been identified by the licensee as containing crystal deposits that met the K-M PM program relay replacement criteria on August 23,1997, but had not been replaced as required. (50-373/98005-15; 50-374/98005-15)
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the pit.// ;0ns of 10 CFR 2.201, CeiTw,0rc;;;alth Edison is hereby required to
' submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region Ill, and a copy to the NRC Resident inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Vblation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation or severity level, (2) the corrective step 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. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an Order i
or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, L
suspended, or revqked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken.
Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
i
1 If you contest this enforcement action, you should alw provide a copy of your response to the Director, Office of Enforcement United States Ndear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent l
possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so i
that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction. If personal privacy or propr' '.y information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a braf.ed copy of your i
response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, you mus.t
)
specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will
- create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by
- 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.
I Dated at Lisle, Illinois l
this 5 th day of June 1998 l
l
.w