ML20036A844

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Violation from Insp on 930307-0402.Violation Noted:Operating Procedure 2-OP-08 Not Properly Implemented in That Control Rod Remained Withdrawn to Position 02 at Completion of Venting Associated Hydraulic Control Unit
ML20036A844
Person / Time
Site: Brunswick Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/30/1993
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20036A834 List:
References
50-324-93-16, NUDOCS 9305170076
Download: ML20036A844 (1)


Text

ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION i

l Carolina Power and Light Company Docket No.: 50-324 Brunswick License No.: DPR-62 During an NRC inspection conducted on March 7 - April 2,1993, a violation of HRC requirements was identified.

In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violation is listed below:

Technical Specification 6.8.1.a requires that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering the activities recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, November 1972, including instructions for venting the control rod drive system.

Unit 2 Operating Procedure 2-0P-08, Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System, Revision 29, Section 8.15, Venting A Hydraulic Control Unit, requires that l

control rods be at position 00 at the completion venting individual hydraulic control units.

l Contrary to the above, on February 23, 1993, Operating Procedure 2-0P-08 was not properly implemented in that Unit 2 control rod 42-19 remained withdrawn to position 02 at the completion of venting its associated hydraulic control unit.

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

I Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Carolina Power and Light Company 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 II, and a copy to the NRC Resident inspector, 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 i

i the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results I

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 within the time specified in this Notice, an order or Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not i

be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper i

should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

i Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 30th day of April 1993 I

i 9305170076 930430 i

DR ADOCK 05000324 PDR

.