ML20236V709: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[IR 05000373/1998005]]
| number = ML20236V709
| issue date = 07/28/1998
| title = Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-373/98-05 & 50-374/98-05 on 980605
| author name = Grant G
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
| addressee name = Kingsley O
| addressee affiliation = COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
| docket = 05000373, 05000374
| license number =
| contact person =
| document report number = 50-373-98-05, 50-373-98-5, 50-374-98-05, 50-374-98-5, NUDOCS 9808040153
| title reference date = 07-03-1998
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 1
}}
See also: [[see also::IR 05000373/1998005]]
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _                                                -_
    ..
  '~*
                                                                                                                                    July 28, 1998                                    l
        Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley
        President, Nuclear Generation Group
        Commonwealth Edison Company
        ATTN: Regulatory Services
        Executive Towers West 111
        1400 Opus Place, Suite 500
        Downers Grove, IL 60515
l        Dear Mr. Kingsley:
        SUBJECT:            NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-373/98005(DRS);
                            50-374/98005(DRS))
                  This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 3,1998 in response to our letter
l
t
!
        dated June 5,1998, transmitting a Notice of Violation associated with Inspection Report No.
        50-373/98005(DRS); 50-374/98005(DRS). These reports summarized the results of an
        Engineering and Technical Support inspection at your LaSalle County Station. We have
        reviewed your corrective actions and have no further questions at this time. These corrective
        actions will be examined during future inspections.
                                                                                                                                        Sincerely,
                                                                                                                                s/Geoffrey E. Grant
                                                                                                                                                                                  '
                                                                                                                                        Geoffrey E. Grant, Director
                                                                                                                                        Division of Reactor Projects
!        Docket Nos.: 50-373;50-374
        License Nos.: NPF-11; NPF-18
i
        Enclosure:          Ltr dated 7/3/98
                                F. Dacimo to USNRC
l
        See Attached Distribution
        DOCUMENT NAME: G:\LAS98005.TY
        To receive a copf of this document, Indicate in the box 'C" = Copy w/o attach /enci "E" = Copy w/ attach / encl "N" = No copy
          OFFICE            Rill:DRs /                                                                                Rill:DRs        Rill:DRP          Rill:EICs i Rill:DRs
          NAME              Duncan/lc                                                                                Jacobson        Hills )          Clayton N  Grant @
          DATE:            7M/98                                                                                      7/2JP98        7/bh              7d98        7t@/98
                                                                                                                                  OFF CIAL RECORD COPY
      9900040153 980728                                                                                            ?
      PDR      ADOCK 05000373                                                                                                                                                      i
      G                                        PDR
                                                                                                                                                                                    '
                                                                                                                    a
 
    .
  . -O
      O. Kingsley                                      2
      cc w/o enct:    M. Wallace, Senior Vice President
                      D. Helwig, Senior Vice President
                      G. Stanley, PWR Vice President
                      J. Perry, BWR.Vice President
                      D. Farrar, Regulatory
                        Services Manager -
                      1. Johnson, Licensing Director
                      DCD - Licensing
                      T. O'Connor, Station Manager
                      P. Barnes, Regulatory Assurance
                        Supervisor
      cc w/ encl:    R. Hubbard
                      N. Schloss, Economist
                        Office of the Attorney General            i
                      State Liaison Officer                      J
                      Chairman, Illinois Commerce
                        Commission
      Distribution:
      SAR (E-Mail)
      Project Mgr., NRR w/enci                                    i
      C. Paperiello, Rill w/enci
!      J. Caldwell, Rlli w/enct
      B. Clayton, Rlli w/ encl
      SRI LaSalle w/ enc!
      DRP.w/ encl
      TSS w/ enc!
      DRS (2) w/enci                                              4
      Rlli PRR w/enct
      PUBLIC IE-01 w/enci
      Docket File w/enci
i
      GREENS                                                      4
      IEO (E-Mail)-
      DOCDESK (E-Mail)
y                                                                  ,
                                                                  l
                                                                  l
'
        '
            040042
                                                          // oI
r
t                                                            -
                                                                __
 
l
f
            /*                                                              125alle Generating 5tation
                                                                            2601 North 21st Road
                                                                                                                                                            hMidg
',                                                                          Marseilles. IL 61341-9757
                                                                            Tel 815-3574761
                                                                                                                                                                          )
                                                                                                                                                                          !
                                                                                                                                                                          !
'
                                                                            July 3,1998
                                                                                                                                                                          :
                                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                                            ~      '
l                                                                            United States Nu'cleaf Regulatory Commission
                                                                            Attention: Document Control Desk
                                                                            Washington, D. C. 20555
                                                                                                                                                                          l
                                                                            Subject:                  Notlce of Violation, NRC Inspection Report
                                                                                                        50-373/374-98005
                                                                                                        LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2                            i
                                                                                                        Facility Operating License NPF-11 and NPF-18                      I
                                                                                                                                                                          '
                                                                                                        NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374
                                                                            Reference:                G. E. Grant letter to O. D. Kingsley, dated June 5,1998,
                                                                                                        Transmitting NRC Inspection Report 50-373/374-98005
                                                                            The enclosed Attachment A containt ' :alle County Station's response to
                                                                            the Notice of Violation that was transmittoc' the Reference I.etter.
                                                                            Attachment B provides the commitment (s) for this submittal.
                                                                            If there are any questions or comments conceming this letter, please refer
                                                                            them to Harold D. Pontious, Jr., Regulatory Assurance Manager, at
                                                                            (815) 357-6761, extension 2383.
                                                                            Respectfully,                                                                                '
                                                                                            a          -
                                                                            Fred R. Dacimo
                                                                            Site Vice President
                                                                            LaSalle County Station
l
                                                                            Enclosures                                                                              ,.
                                                                                                                                                                    ?
                                                                            cc:    ./C. A. Paperiello, Acting NRC Region 111 Administrator                            -
                                                                                      M. P. Huber, NRC Senior Resident inspector - LaSalle
                                                                                      D. M. Skay, Project Manager - NRR - LaSalle
                                                                                      F. Niziolek, IDNS Senior Reactor Analyst
                                                                            A th1icom Company
  _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ - _ - - _ . . _ - - _ __                                                                                      --
 
            - _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
                                    -
        ,  .
      G
'                                                                                                                                              ATTACHMENT A
      '
                                                                                                                                      RESPONSE TO NOTICE @F VIOLATION    l
                                                                                                                                          NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                                                                                                                                373/374-98005
                                                                          VIOLATION: 373/374-98005-03
                                                                                                                                                                          l
                                                                          10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, " Instructions, Procedures, and
                                                                          Drawings," requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by                  ,
  ,
                                                                          documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to                    l
                                                                          the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these                          - !
(                                                                          instructions, procedures, or drawings.
                                                                                                                                    '            ~
,                                                                        Contrary to ibe above, as of April 21,1998, the licensee failed to adequately
l                                                                          perform combustible loading calculations required by LaSalle Administrative
!
                                                                          Procedure LAP 240-6, " Temporary Alterations," Revision 36, dated
l                                                                        August 21,1997, associated with temporary alterations 2-0030-97 and
l                                                                          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.
                                                                                                                                                                          {
                                                                          REASON FOR VIOLATION:
!
                                                                          Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) agrees that for temporary
                                                                          alterations (TALTs) 2-0030 97 and 1-0122-97 the combustible loading
                                                                          calculations, required by LaSalle Administrative Procedure LAP 240-6,
                                                                          " Temporary Alterations," were not adequately performed.
                                                                          An investigation identified that TALTs 2-0030-97 and 1-0122 97 were -
                                                                          duplicated from TALT 1-0121-97. The engineer who prepared the Fire
                                                                          Protection Screening for TALT 1-0121-97 failed to determine an accurate
                                                                          value of combustible material per unit length of hose and then compounded                        '
l                                                                        the error by performing an inaccurate multiplication function. Additionally,
,                                                                        the supervisor who reviewed the data failed to notice the error in the
<
                                                                          calculation. These errors are broadly characterized as inattention to detail
                                                                        and inadequate self-checking.
                                                                        The p.er unit combustible material value used for TALT 1-0121-97 was then
                                                                        used without additional review for the Fire Protection Screening in
                                                                        TALTs 2-0029-97,1-0122-97, and 2-0030-97. This caused the " Change in
                                                                        Combustible Loading" calculation in Nuclear Engineering Procedure
                                                                        (NEP) 04-07 Exhibit A, Table 1, for each of the four noted TALTs, to be
                                                                        erroneously calculated at less than 1000 BTU per square foot. Because the
,
                                                                        calculated value was less than 1000 BTU per square foot that is procedurally
                                                                        required, the additional evaluation was not performed. Therefore, the actual
                                                                        increase in combustible loading of 1257 BTU per square foot of fire zone                        '
                                                                        area (actual value when calculation was performed correctly) was not
[~                                                                      evaluated.
l,                                                                                                                                                    1
- _ _ _ _ _                                                            _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _                  __. . - _ _ .___
 
                                      _ _      _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _              __
      ,- -- _ --- ---.---- _ ------
  -
                                                                            ATTACHMENT A
    '
                                        RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                            NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                                                                  373/374-98005
                  The consequences of this incident were minimal. Comparison of
                  combustible loading limits for the applicable fire zones to the total
                  combustible loading in each zone, plus the incremental increase in the zone
                  due to the hose, demonstrated that significant margin (approximately 95%)
l
'
                  was still available before the combustible limit would be reached. Therefore,
                  the combustible loading limits were not challenged.
l
L                  CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED:
                  An evaluation of this issue identified two additional related TALTs
l                  (1-0121-97 and 2-0029-97) with the same type combustible loading
i                calculation error. These TALTs performed similar plant modifications for the
                  1 E12-F068A and 2E12-F068A residual heat removal service water isolation
                  valves, respectively. These TALTs were the predecessors of
l                TALTs 1-0122-97 and 2'-0030 97 identified in the violation.
                  When the combustible loading calculation in the Fire Protection Screening
L                for TALT 2-0030-97 was found to be in error, the calculation was corrected                              ,
l                (which also addressed the three other TALTs) and the Fire Protection                                      4
!                Screening revised. The revised screening was evaluated and accepted by                                  i
                  the Fire Protection Program Coordinator. It concluded that there was no                                  I
i                adverse impact to the LaSalle Station Fire Protection commitments. It was
l
'                also noted that no extended conditions existed since the four TALTs affected                              l
                  by the error had been removed.                                                                            '
<
                  Additionally, a review of all active installed TALTs was performed to                                    1
                  determine if any had similar Fire Protection Screening issues. No active                                  l
                  TALTs with Fire Protection Screenings were identified as having similar
                  errors in the combustible loading calculation.
:                CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN TO AVOID FURTHER VIOLATION:
                  The supervisor involved in the event has been counseled and now
                  understands the importance of reviewing calculations to ensure they are
                  complete and accurate.
-
                  This event has been discussed in the design engineering weekly
l                communications meeting with emphasis placed on the importance of
                  accuracy in performing and reviewing calculations.
                  DATE WHEN FULL COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED:
                  Full compliance was achieved on April 15,1998, with the evaluation of the
                  correctly calculated combustible loading.
                            -
l                                                                                        2
!
                                                                                                                            1
                                                                                                    _--_--_-- ______ ---_ J
 
      -                  -
    ,
  ,
                                                    .                                  ATTACHMENT A
  '
                                                                          RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                                                                NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                                                                        373/374-98005
                                                      VIOLATION: 373/374-9800504
                                                      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, malfunctions, deficiencies, 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.
                                                      Contrary 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 been previously identified by the NRC on
                                                      June 19,1997, had not been corrected.
                                                      REASON FOR VIOLATION:
                                                      Comed agrees that the unauthorized plant design change to the Unit 0,1 A
                                                      and 2A diesel generator er box drains was not corrected in a timely manner.
                                                      A review of this incident indicates a human performance error and a lack of
                                                      follow through on the part of the system engineer in that the administrative
                                                      procedure was not followed which resulted in the issue not being resolved in
                                                      a timely manner.
                                                      A Problem identification Form (PIF) was written to bring this issue to
                                                      management's attention on June 16,1997. This PIF was closed to an
                                                      existing Engineering Request (ER) which asked for an evaluation to hard
                                                      pipe the Air Box drains to floor drains or justify the use of tygon tubing in this
                                                      application. This was coded as a Plant Design Change Request (PDCR)
                                                      which was assigned a "B" priority under the ER process with a due date of
                                                      June 24,1998. This required presentation to a technical review committee
                                                      within six months of the initiation of the ER.
                                                      The system engineer " approved" the ER on August 5,1997, forwarding it to
                                                      Design Engineering without completing the required technical evaluation in
l
                                                      accordance with LaSalle Administrative Procedure (LAP) 130016,
                                                      " Engineering Request." The system engineer who forwarded the ER did'not          '
        '                                            provide comments or complete required actions when he approved the ER,
                                                      therefore, no follow-up action was taken and the issue remained in the ER
                                                      orocess and was not presented to a technical review committee.
                                                                                                                                        i
                                                      A second PIF was written on March 31,1998, identifying the lack of follow-
                                                      up on the initial discrepancy. The ER'was then evaluated and received final
                                                      approval on May 5,1998, with the decision to "as-build" the current
                                                      configuration.
                                                                                              3
          - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
  '
                                        ATTACHMENT A
    '
                            RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                  NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                          373/374-98005
        A contributing factor in this failure was the high tumover of personnel
        involved in the resolution of this discrepancy. The Temporary Alteration
        Coordinator who originated the action left in late 1997. The system engineer
        responsible for the evaluation also left at the same time. The combination
        of these discreet events directly contributed to the lack of emphasis being
        placed on this corrective action.
        CORRECTIVE STEPS.TAKEN.AND RESULTS ACHIEVED:
        The current configuration was evaluated as an "as-built" change, which has
        received a technical evaluation and a safety evaluation under 10 CFR 50.59.
        The results of the initial technical evaluation confirmed that there was no
        adverse impact on the diesels in this configuration. This configuration
        complies with the manufacturer's recommendation to keep the drains open
        to preclude moisture build-up in the air boxes.
        CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN TO AVOID FURTHER VIOLATION:
        The engineer involved in this event is no longer employed by Comed.
                                                                                      '
        System Readiness Reviews (SRR) have been conducted in preparation for
        Unit 1 start-up. This required a review of all outstanding work (including
        ERs) against a given system and the identification of issues which require
,
        action for restart or an affirmation that the work is appropriately classified
        and can be worked to its current schedule date following restart. A board of
        management personnel from multiple departments reviews the results of the
        SSR. On the board's recommendation the system is classified as ready.
        This review will ensure systems have no unauthorized design changes.
        DATE WHEN FULL COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED:
        Full compliance was achieved on June 19,1998, with completion of the "as
        built" evaluation for the tygon tubing.
;
l
l
      .
I
                                                4
 
    -                                                  - - - - ---  --        - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _
        , ,
      :
  '
                                            ATTACHMENT A
      *                        RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                      NRC INSPECTION REPORT
!
                                            373/374-98005
            VIOLATION: 373/374-98005-12
                                                                                                        !
l
            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, malfunctions, deficiencies, 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            I
l            Is determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition.
;          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                    f
            non-safety-related fuse discrepancies had not been evaluated.
            REASON FOR VIOLATION:
;
            Comed agrees that the fuse discrepancies identified in 1994 were not
            properly addressed. Numerous fuse discrepancies associated with safety
,          related and non-safety-related equipment were identified, but were not
I
            reviewed or evaluated. LaSalle Administrative Procedure (LAP) 400-11,
,
            " Fuse Replacement Program" failed to provide adequate guidance to ensure
l          timely resolution of fuse issues. In addition, there was complacency and a
i          lack of attention regarding the fuse control program on the part of
            management personnel that also contributed to the violation. Historically,
I          fuse discrepancies rarely resulted in operability issues or unacceptable
            fuses. This led personnel to focus on the fact that the fuse size
            discrepancies were identified rather than focusing on evaluating the
            discrepancies.
l          CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED:
            Upon identifying that the fuse discrepancies were not evaluated, the
            discrepancies were separated into two categories. The first category
            contained actual fuse discrepancies, for example, the installed fuse was a
            different size or type than that which was stated on the fuse list. The second
            category are not actual discrepancies and can be characterized as missing
            information on the fuse list (e.g., design size, fuse type, etc.).
            A preliminary assessment of each fuse discrepancy in the first category was
            performed. This assessment was based on a review of the affected
            schematic diagram and engineering judgment. The main criteria for the
            assessments were to determine if the installed fuse is able to handle the
            continuous circuit load. This assessment determined that all of the fuses
            were acceptable.
                                                    5
 
        . .
      *
    .
  *
                                            ATTACHMENT A
    ,                          RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                      NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                              373/374-98005
            A detailed analysis in accordance with procedure LAP-400-11 " Fuse
            Replacement Program" was subsequently performed for each Unit 1, Unit 2,
            and Unit 0 safety-related fuse discrepancy in the first category. These
            evaluations determined that no fuses required replacement prior to Unit 1
            start up. A detailed analysis was also performed for 79 of the 83
            non-safety-related fuse discrepancies in the first category for Units 1 and O. .
            These evaluations determined that no fuses required replacement prior to
  .
            Unit 1 start-up. The four remaining Unit 1 and Unit 0 discrepancies will be
            completed prior to Unit 1 restart (NTS # 373-100-98-00512.02). The other
            fuse discrepancies (i.e., the Unit 2 non-safety-related discrepancies in the
            first category and the entire second category) are not required for Unit 1      '
            start-up. However, they will be evaluated by August 31,1998
            (NTS # 373-100-98-00512.01).
            CORRECT 3VE STEPS TAKEN TO AVOID FURTHER VIOLATION:
            LAP-400-11, " Fuse Replacement Program" was revised to include the
            requirement to track all fuse discrepancies by initiating an Engineering
            Request (ER) for each fuse discrepancy. This will ensure evaluation
            because ERs are routinely reviewed and prioritized in accordance with
            station procedures.
            DATE WHEN FULL COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED-                  .                  i
            Full compliance will be met for Unit 1 on July 28,1998, when the fuses
            essential for Unit 1 start-up are evaluated. The remaining fuse
            discrepancies, not required for Unit 1 start-up, will be evaluated by
            August 31,1998.
;
                                                    6
L
 
      '
    *
  ;                                                                                      l
                                        ATTACHMENT A
  '
                            RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION                              i
                                  NRC INSPECTION REPORT                                  I
                                        373/374-98005
        VIOLATION: 373/374-98005-15
        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, malfunctions, deficiencies, and nonconformances are          ]
                                                                                        l
                                                                                          '
        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.
                                                                                        l
        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 Center 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.
        REASON FOR VIOLATION:
        Comed agrees that based upon the K-M Preventive Maintenance (PM)
        program relay replacement criteria presented during the inspection the K-M
        relay should have been replaced. The replacement criteria presented stated
        that any safety-related (SR) or important to safety (ITS) relay found to exhibit
        crystal growth was to be replaced, and the relay in question exhibited crystal
        growth.
                                                                                          l
                                                                                          l
        However, subsequent to the inspection it was discovered that the                l
        acceptance criteria for the K-M relays stated that K-M relays used as 74
        devices (alarm relays) in non-safety, ITS applications only required
        replacement if the relays were found to be nonfunctional. This is true of ITS,
        74, K-M relays even if crystal deposits are present on the relay. The relay
        identified during the inspection (MCC 132Y-2 cubicle B1) is a spare
        (contacts not used), non safety but ITS,74 relay that had been shown to be
        functional using LaSalle Electrical Surveillance (LES) GM-109, " Inspection of
        480V Klockner-Moeller Motor Control Center" and, as such, did not require
        replacement.
!
                                                7
(
 
    .
      __-_                  _ ____ - _-__ ______ - ___-___ _
                                                                  ATTACHMENT A              i
                                        RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION                    l
                                                              NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                                                  373/374-98005
                                                                                            1
          The confusion in the acceptance criteria presented to the inspectors was
          created by the fact that there are four separate categories for classifying the  l
          K-M relays. Two categories are not part of the inspection project and two
                                                                                            {
          are part of the inspection project. The K-M relays that are not part of the
          inspection project are the SR/EQ relays, which are being replaced this
          outage regardless of condition. The normal replacement frequency for these
          relays is included in the EQ Binders. The other is non-safety and not
  ,
          important to safety related, which are replaced when they become                .
          nonfunctional.
                                                                                            1
          The two categories of K-M relays that are par' of the inspection project          i
          are:
                    1)    All SR relays and ITS non-74 relays. The acceptance criteria
                          for these relays is no crystallization, or no discoloration and
                          cracking, or failure of their surveillance test (LES-GM-109). If
                          any of these criteria are not met, then the relays are replaced.
                    2)    ITS 74 relays, which have an acceptance criteria of
                          replacement if they become non-functional or failure of their
                          surveillance test (LES-GM-109).
          The relay in question was an ITS 74 relay. As a result of a lack of attention
          to detail by the cognizant engineer, this distinction was not recognized at the
          time the information was provided.
          CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED:
          A review was performed of all relays being addressed by the K-M
          replacement program, no other incidents of SR or ITS identified as having
          crystals and .bsequently not replaced were identified.
          The relay identified during the inspection has been replaced, even though it
          was not required.
          After it was recognized that incorrect acceptance criteria had been presented
          during the inspection, NRC Region 111 personnel were informed of the correct
          acceptance criteria.
!
                                                                        8
-                                                                                            l
 
              -      -        --
                                      -      -.---- - . - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    ,
                                      ATTACHMENT A
                          RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                  NRC INSPECTION REPORT
                                        373/374-98005
      CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN TO AVOlD FURTHER VIOLATION:
      The individual involved in this incident has been counseled by his supervisor
      regarding the I:nportance of providing complete and accurate information to
      inspectors.
      Additionally this incident was discussed in a departmental meeting in
,    May 1998 to heighten the awareness of others to errors of this nature.
      DATE WHEN FULL COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED:
                                                                                                                                  l
      Full compliance has been maintained,
                                                                                                                                l
                                                                                                                                J
                                                                                                                                  l
                                                                                                                                !
                                                                                                                                  l
  .
I
'
                                                                                                                                  l
l
                                                      9
                                                                                                                                ;
 
                      _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    _ _ _ _ _ _  _      _    __  _ __  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  _
  ,
                                                                                                                    I
                                                        ATTACHMENTS                                                j
                                                  REGULATORY COMMITMENT (S)                                        l
                                                                                                                    l
    The following identifies those actions committed to by Comed in this
    document. Any other actions discussed in this submittal represent intended                                      '
    or planned actions by Comed. They are described to the NRC for the NRC's
    information and are not regulatory commitments.
        Regulatory Commitment (s)                                            Tracking Number
    The four remaining Unit 1 and                                      NTS # 373-100-98-00512.02
    Unit 0 discrepancies will be                                                                                      l
    completed prior to Unit 1 restart.
    The other fuse discrepancies (i.e., - - NTS # 373-100-98-00512.01                                            -
    the Unit 2 non . safety-related                                                                                  i
    discrepancies in the first category
    and the entire second category) are
    not required for Unit 1 start-up.
    However, they will be evaluated by
    August 31,1998.
                                                                                                                    t
                                                                                                                    i
                                                                                                                    !
                                                                                                                    !
                                                                                                                    l
                                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                                      i
                                                                                                                      i
i
i
                                                                      1
    __                                                _
}}

Revision as of 09:21, 25 January 2022

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20236V709&oldid=3420040"