ML20217L063

Notice of Violation from Insp on 971207-980131.Violation Noted:Measures Not Established to Assure That Significant Conditions Adverse to Quality Promptly Identified & Corrected

ML20217L063
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	04/01/1998
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20217L039	List: IR 05000443/1997008 ML20217L063
References
50-443-97-08, 50-443-97-8, EA-98-073, EA-98-73, NUDOCS 9804070364
Download: ML20217L063 (3)

Text

.-

ENCLOSURE NOTICE OF VIOLATION

. North Atlantic Energy Service Docket No. 50-443 Corporation License No. NPF-86 Seabrook Station EA 98-073 During an NRC inspection conducted between December 7,1997, and January 31,1998, for which an exit meeting was held on February 12,1998, three violations of NRC requirements wars identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions,' NUREG-1600,the violations are listed below:

10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Action, requires, in part, that measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deficiencies , deviations, defective material and equipment, and nonconformances are promptly identified and corrected. 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. The identification of the significant condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition, and the corrective actim taken shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management.

Contrary to the above, measures were not established to assure that significant conditions adverse to quality were promptly identified and corrected, and the causes of the conditions were determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition.

Specifically, 1.- Between November 1996 and December 5,1997, a condition adverse to quality existed involving leakage from stainless steel pipe in the vicinity of the "B" Residual Heat Removal pump suction relief valve (RC-V-89), and this condition adverse to quality was not identified until December 5,1997, despite prior opportunities to do so. Specifically,

a. In November 1996, the licensee had been aware of the existence of boric acid residue external to pipe wrap material on the piping.

However, the licensee did. not remove the pipe wrap material to positively identify the source of this residue until December 5,1997 even though engineers, supervisors,' and maintenance and health physics ,

technicians had been aware of this condition,

b. During the June 1997 refueling outage, the licensee planned to remove l the pipe wrap material and inspect this section of piping. Although a '

system engineer determined, on or about June 15,1997, that this work l activity did not occur and informed his supervisor, an adverse condition ~ l report was not gener9ted, and actions were not taken to remove the insulation and inspect the pipe prior to the start-up on June 26,1997.

(01013)-

q- 9004070364 900401 PDR ADOCK 05000443 i G -

PDR < j

a 4

Enclosure 2

2. Since 1993, a condition advorse to quality existed involving degradation of the control building air conditioning .(CBA) compressors, used to cool critical instruments within the control room for up to thirty days following a postulated accident, which resulted in multiple compressor failures. Corrective action was not taken until December 1997 to address the root causes for this condition, even though prior opportunities existed to address this problem. Specifically, the licensee's staff completed an engineering evaluation in 1994 (to address a 1993 CBA compressor failure), and that evaluation resulted in development of a design change request to correct the root cause(s) for the cornpressor failure.

Those causes included: loss of bearing lubrication caused by refrigerant contamination of the lubricating oil; and/or refrigerant slugging to the cylinder piston assembly. Although the modification was scheduled to be implemented in the third quarter of 1996, it was delayed several times and not implemented until after another CBA compressor failed on December 16,1997. In each of the prior cases when the compressors failed, the licensee's corrective actions focused on component replacement rather than correcting the root causes of the failures. (02013)

3. In November 1997, the NRC observed that a caution tag on a pressure switch for the Positive Displacement Charging Pump indicated that the pump could trip off from starting due to an oilleak from the pump's sensing'line. Although this leak challenged the reliability of the pump, a component important to safety, the )

i licensee's plans did not include repair of the leak until after installation of a modification to relocate the pressure switch. However,in October 1997,the plans for the modification were canceled without resolving this adverse condition. (03013)

These violations represent a Severity Level 111 problem (Supplement 1).

Pursuant to provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation 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 1, 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 Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation, (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. 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 or Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified,

~

suspended, or revoked, or why such other actions as may be proper should not be taken.

Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

1

f Enclosure 3 Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction. if personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your 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 must 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 a commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please pro fide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.

Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this 1st day of April 1998 S

'?