IR 07100020/2011007

Notice of Violation from Insp on 971020-1107.Violation Noted:Danger Tags97-753 & 97-800 Were Installed on 971007 & 18,w/o Tag Sequence Numbers Being Assigned to Danger Tag Location Sheet

ML20203D422
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach, 07100020
Issue date:	02/19/1998
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20203D404	List: IR 07100020/2011007 ML20203D399 ML20203D436
References
50-266-97-23, 50-301-97-23, NUDOCS 9802260055
Download: ML20203D422 (3)

Text

__

_

6 .-

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Wisconsin Electric Power Company Docket No. 50-266; 50-301

-

Point Beach Nuclear Plant . License No. DPR 24; DPR 27 During an NRC inspection conducted from October 20 through November 7,1997, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with NUREG 1600," General Statement of

< Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," the violations are listed below; I

! .

.

l CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, "In=tructions, Procedures, and Drawings,"

). requires in part, that activitbs affecting quality be prescribed by documented

! procadures, of a type appropricte to the circumstances'and that the activities be accomplished !n accordance with these procedures. The procedures are to include ,

4 appropriate quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished.

'

Procedure NP 1.9.15, " anger Tag Procedure," Revision 3, Section 6.2.1 stated, in

! part, that the preparer . ill fill out the danger tag location sheet with tag sequence

!

-

numbers. Section 6.3.o . %ted, in part, that the qualified tagger shall position

,

equipment / components aJ specified in the " sequence" column and " required position"

'- column on the danger tag location sheet.

! - Procedure NP 5.3.7, " Operability Determinations,". Attachment A. " Management _

- Expectations for Performing a Written Prompt Operability Determination," described

types of conditions that should receive a written operability evaluation if the system, 4 structure, or component was to remain in service. _ ltem 2.6 of this attachment listed one type of condition as " Errors in testing, testing methodology, instrumentation or data that

,

could invalidate surveillance testing that is used to demonstrate continued operability of SSCs (systems, structures, and components)."

Contrary to the above:

l Danger tags97-753 and 97-800 were installed on October 7,1997, and -

October 18,1997, withe ;t tag sequence numbers being assigned to the danger

- tag location sheet.

b_ Although condition report QCR 97-0148, dated July 18,1997, documented that requirements for testing safety related relief valves per ASME Section XI 1986-OM-1(1981) were not met in all cases, no prompt operability determination had been completed for all the affected valves as of November 7,199 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).

,

a

4 9002260055 900219 -

gDR ADOCK 05000266

,

PM

'

.a .- . - =. .-

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ .

\

.

Notice of Vlolation 2 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion Xil, " Control of Measuring and Test Equipment,"

requires, in part, that measures be established to assure that instruments and other measuring and testing devices used in activities affecting quality are properly controlled, calibrated, and adjusted at specified periods to maintain accuracy within necessary limit Contrary to the above, on October 21,1997, while performing technical specification surveillance procedures 2f iP 9071 1 "A05 4160/480 Degraded and Loss of Voltage Relay Monthly Survelllance and 2RMP 90712 "A06 4160/480 Degraded and Loss of Voltage Reiay Monthly Surveillance" on Unit 2, personnel used an uncalibrated stopwatch to measure the 4.16 kV bus undervoltage relays 2 274/A05,2 275/A05,

! 2 276/A05,2 27-4/A06(27-4),2 27 5/A06(27-5) and 2 27-6/A06(27-6) pickup time delay setpoint value This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1). CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Criterion XVI," Corrective Action," requires, in part, that measures be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as deficiencies and nonconformances, are promptly identified and corrected. Violation 50-266/96002-05(DRP),50-301/96002-05(DRP), dated April 17,1996, identified that changes to the plant, systems and parameters were not routinely updated into the final safety analysis report (FSAR).

Contrary to the above, as of November 7,1997, corrective actions to the above violation were not sufficient to assure that previous changes to plant systems that affected the FSAR were identified and corrected as follows: During a screening on October 1,1997, the licensee failed to identify that the FSAR had never been updated to reflect a change to procedures which occurred in 198 The licensee had not revised the FSAR to correct the description of the effects of a loss of a transmission line to the plant, althougn the need for such a revision was identified in 1993.

,

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement 1).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Wisconsin Electric is hereby required to submit a written statement - t <planation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Was,hington, DC 20555-0001, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region Ill, 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: (1) the reason for the violation, or if contested, the basis for

. _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ -

.

f Notice of Violation 3 disputing the violation or the severity level; (2) the corrective steps taken and the results achieved; (3) the corrective steps to be taken to avoid ft1her violations; and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your resr~1se 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 a Demand for information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration may be given to extendir.g your response time, if you contest ti..s enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your reaponse to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regul? tory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-000 Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent j

,

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 privact or proprietary !ntormation i

'

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 commercial or financial information).

Dated at Lisle, Illinois, thisti th day of February 1998 l

-. _____________d