ML20149G318: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| page count = 3 | | page count = 3 | ||
}} | }} | ||
See also: [[see also::IR 07100130/2012004]] | |||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:s . . | {{#Wiki_filter:s . . | ||
ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Georgia Power Company Docket No. 50-424 Vogtle License No. NPF-68 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on November 30 - | ENCLOSURE 1 | ||
December 4, December 14 - 18, 1987, and January 5, 1988, 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 (1988), the violations are listed below: | NOTICE OF VIOLATION | ||
A. 10 CFR 50.49(a) requires that each holder of a license establish a prog am for qualifying electric equipment. 10 CFR 50.49(b)(3) lists certain post-accident monitoring system equipment as being important to safety. | Georgia Power Company Docket No. 50-424 | ||
10 CFR 50.49 paragraphs (f), (k), and (j), NUREG-0588, and IEEE 323-1974 require that: | Vogtle License No. NPF-68 | ||
During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on | |||
November 30 - | |||
its application for the entire period during which the covered item is installed in the Nuclear Power Plant. | December 4, December 14 - 18, 1987, and January 5, 1988, | ||
Contrary to the above, a Core Exit Thermocouple Junction Box (post-accident monitoring instrumentation) in containment was left in an unqualified environmental condition following system maintenance. This condition was identified on April 13, 1987, on MWO 18704972 which stated that no documentation could be located to verify irsta'.lation of the environmental seal for the junction box. The condition was not corrected until October 10, 1987, following six months of power operation. | violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the | ||
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I). | "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR | ||
B. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion V, and the licensee's accepted QA program, Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSAR) Section 17.2.5, require that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented procedures and shall be accomplished in accordance with these procedures. The | Part 2, Appendix C (1988), the violations are listed below: | ||
; licentec Deficiency Control Procedure, 00150-C, Revision 6, Sections 1 and 1.2, require that conditions adverse to quality be identified and processed oer this procedure. | A. 10 CFR 50.49(a) requires that each holder of a license establish a prog am | ||
Contrary to the above, problems involving main steam, chemical and volume control, main feed, power operated relief valves, and post-accident monitoring instrumentation systems were not identified as conditions adverse to quality. They were processed via the maintenance work order ' | for qualifying electric equipment. 10 CFR 50.49(b)(3) lists certain | ||
program rather than the approved deficiency control program. The specific work orders are: | post-accident monitoring system equipment as being important to safety. | ||
8802100223 080211 PDR ADOCK 05000424 0 DCD | 10 CFR 50.49 paragraphs (f), (k), and (j), NUREG-0588, and IEEE 323-1974 | ||
require that: | |||
1. This equipment be installed in a manner and position equivalcat to | |||
the as tested /as analyzed condition and; ! | |||
2. Documentation be maintained to verify the equipment is qualified for | |||
i | |||
its application for the entire period during which the covered item | |||
is installed in the Nuclear Power Plant. | |||
Contrary to the above, a Core Exit Thermocouple Junction Box | |||
(post-accident monitoring instrumentation) in containment was left in an | |||
unqualified environmental condition following system maintenance. This | |||
condition was identified on April 13, 1987, on MWO 18704972 which stated | |||
that no documentation could be located to verify irsta'.lation of the | |||
environmental seal for the junction box. The condition was not corrected | |||
until October 10, 1987, following six months of power operation. | |||
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I). | |||
B. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion V, and the licensee's accepted QA program, | |||
Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSAR) Section 17.2.5, require that | |||
activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented procedures | |||
and shall be accomplished in accordance with these procedures. The | |||
; licentec Deficiency Control Procedure, 00150-C, Revision 6, Sections 1 and | |||
1.2, require that conditions adverse to quality be identified and | |||
processed oer this procedure. | |||
Contrary to the above, problems involving main steam, chemical and volume | |||
control, main feed, power operated relief valves, and post-accident | |||
monitoring instrumentation systems were not identified as conditions | |||
adverse to quality. They were processed via the maintenance work order ' | |||
program rather than the approved deficiency control program. The specific | |||
work orders are: | |||
8802100223 080211 | |||
PDR ADOCK 05000424 | |||
0 DCD | |||
i . | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | ||
Georgia Power Company 2 Occket No. 50-424 Vogtle License No. NPF-68 MWO 18705430 MWO 18706938 MWO 18701732 MWO 18702035 MWO 18704972 This is a severity Level V violation (Supplement I). | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ . | ||
C. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XI, and the licensee's accepted QA program, FSAR Section 17.2.11, collectively require that a test program be estab-li'J.ed to assure that all testing required to demonstrate that systems will perform satisfactorily in service is performed in accordance with written test procedures. Additionally, Procedure SUM 22, Maintenance Work Orders, Revision 16, Section 6.7.1, states that where applicable (dering the preoperational phase), a functional test is required after maintenance work to verify that systems are capable of performing their intended function. | i . | ||
Contrary to the above, following preoperational modifications to the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump turbine speed indication circuit under MWO 18620139, a functional test was not performed to verify that this system would perform satisfactorily in service. The modifica-tion placed an oversized resistor in the circuit which resulted in a loss of AFW turbine speed indication in the control room and shutdown Panel C. | Georgia Power Company 2 Occket No. 50-424 | ||
This condition was discovered three months later and was not repaired until after two months of power operations. | Vogtle License No. NPF-68 | ||
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I). | MWO 18705430 | ||
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Georgia Power Company is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice. | MWO 18706938 | ||
This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include [for each violation]: (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the violation, if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which I | MWO 18701732 | ||
MWO 18702035 | |||
MWO 18704972 | |||
This is a severity Level V violation (Supplement I). | |||
C. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XI, and the licensee's accepted QA program, | |||
FSAR Section 17.2.11, collectively require that a test program be estab- | |||
li'J.ed to assure that all testing required to demonstrate that systems | |||
will perform satisfactorily in service is performed in accordance with | |||
written test procedures. Additionally, Procedure SUM 22, Maintenance Work | |||
Orders, Revision 16, Section 6.7.1, states that where applicable (dering | |||
the preoperational phase), a functional test is required after maintenance | |||
work to verify that systems are capable of performing their intended | |||
function. | |||
Contrary to the above, following preoperational modifications to the | |||
turbine driven auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump turbine speed indication | |||
circuit under MWO 18620139, a functional test was not performed to verify | |||
that this system would perform satisfactorily in service. The modifica- | |||
tion placed an oversized resistor in the circuit which resulted in a loss | |||
of AFW turbine speed indication in the control room and shutdown Panel C. | |||
This condition was discovered three months later and was not repaired | |||
until after two months of power operations. | |||
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I). | |||
' | |||
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Georgia Power Company is hereby | |||
required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Nuclear Regulatory | |||
Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555, with a copy to | |||
the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident | |||
Inspector, 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) admission or denial of the violation, | |||
(2) the reason for the violation, if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which | |||
! | |||
I | |||
% 0 Georgia Power Company 3 Docket No. 50-424 Vogtle License No. NPF-68 (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) the date when full compliance l will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to l | _____ | ||
extending the response time. If an adequate reply is not received within the i time specified in this Notice, an order may be issutd to show cause why the l license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. | . | ||
1 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | .. | ||
])W? W/lUbb Caudie A. Ju ian, Chief'lt Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Dated at Atlanta, Georgia, this lith day of February 1988 1 | _ | ||
% 0 | |||
Georgia Power Company 3 Docket No. 50-424 | |||
Vogtle License No. NPF-68 | |||
(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) the date when full compliance | |||
l will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to | |||
l | |||
extending the response time. If an adequate reply is not received within the | |||
i time specified in this Notice, an order may be issutd to show cause why the | |||
l license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action | |||
' | |||
as may be proper should not be taken. | |||
1 | |||
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
])W? W/lUbb | |||
Caudie A. Ju ian, Chief'lt | |||
Operations Branch | |||
Division of Reactor Safety | |||
Dated at Atlanta, Georgia, | |||
this lith day of February 1988 | |||
1 | |||
i | i | ||
-- - . - - . - - - - - -}} | . | ||
; | |||
-- - . - - . - - - - - - | |||
}} |
Latest revision as of 18:22, 9 September 2023
ML20149G318 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Vogtle ![]() |
Issue date: | 02/11/1988 |
From: | Julian C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML20149G314 | List: |
References | |
50-424-87-69, NUDOCS 8802180223 | |
Download: ML20149G318 (3) | |
See also: IR 07100130/2012004
Text
s . .
ENCLOSURE 1
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Georgia Power Company Docket No. 50-424
Vogtle License No. NPF-68
During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on
November 30 -
December 4, December 14 - 18, 1987, and January 5, 1988,
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 (1988), the violations are listed below:
A. 10 CFR 50.49(a) requires that each holder of a license establish a prog am
for qualifying electric equipment. 10 CFR 50.49(b)(3) lists certain
post-accident monitoring system equipment as being important to safety.
10 CFR 50.49 paragraphs (f), (k), and (j), NUREG-0588, and IEEE 323-1974
require that:
1. This equipment be installed in a manner and position equivalcat to
the as tested /as analyzed condition and; !
2. Documentation be maintained to verify the equipment is qualified for
i
its application for the entire period during which the covered item
is installed in the Nuclear Power Plant.
Contrary to the above, a Core Exit Thermocouple Junction Box
(post-accident monitoring instrumentation) in containment was left in an
unqualified environmental condition following system maintenance. This
condition was identified on April 13, 1987, on MWO 18704972 which stated
that no documentation could be located to verify irsta'.lation of the
environmental seal for the junction box. The condition was not corrected
until October 10, 1987, following six months of power operation.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
B. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion V, and the licensee's accepted QA program,
Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSAR) Section 17.2.5, require that
activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented procedures
and shall be accomplished in accordance with these procedures. The
- licentec Deficiency Control Procedure, 00150-C, Revision 6, Sections 1 and
1.2, require that conditions adverse to quality be identified and
processed oer this procedure.
Contrary to the above, problems involving main steam, chemical and volume
control, main feed, power operated relief valves, and post-accident
monitoring instrumentation systems were not identified as conditions
adverse to quality. They were processed via the maintenance work order '
program rather than the approved deficiency control program. The specific
work orders are:
8802100223 080211
PDR ADOCK 05000424
0 DCD
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ .
i .
Georgia Power Company 2 Occket No. 50-424
Vogtle License No. NPF-68
MWO 18705430
MWO 18706938
MWO 18701732
MWO 18702035
MWO 18704972
This is a severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
C. 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XI, and the licensee's accepted QA program,
FSAR Section 17.2.11, collectively require that a test program be estab-
li'J.ed to assure that all testing required to demonstrate that systems
will perform satisfactorily in service is performed in accordance with
written test procedures. Additionally, Procedure SUM 22, Maintenance Work
Orders, Revision 16, Section 6.7.1, states that where applicable (dering
the preoperational phase), a functional test is required after maintenance
work to verify that systems are capable of performing their intended
function.
Contrary to the above, following preoperational modifications to the
turbine driven auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump turbine speed indication
circuit under MWO 18620139, a functional test was not performed to verify
that this system would perform satisfactorily in service. The modifica-
tion placed an oversized resistor in the circuit which resulted in a loss
of AFW turbine speed indication in the control room and shutdown Panel C.
This condition was discovered three months later and was not repaired
until after two months of power operations.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement I).
'
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Georgia Power Company is hereby
required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555, with a copy to
the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident
Inspector, 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) admission or denial of the violation,
(2) the reason for the violation, if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which
!
I
_____
.
..
_
% 0
Georgia Power Company 3 Docket No. 50-424
Vogtle License No. NPF-68
(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) the date when full compliance
l will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to
l
extending the response time. If an adequate reply is not received within the
i time specified in this Notice, an order may be issutd to show cause why the
l license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action
'
as may be proper should not be taken.
1
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
])W? W/lUbb
Caudie A. Ju ian, Chief'lt
Operations Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
Dated at Atlanta, Georgia,
this lith day of February 1988
1
i
.
-- - . - - . - - - - - -