ML20034G098

From kanterella
Revision as of 06:58, 20 December 2024 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Violation from Insp on 930103-0206.Violation Noted:Vendor Technical Representatives & One Electrician Exceeded 72 H or Work in 7 Day Period W/O Proper Authorization
ML20034G098
Person / Time
Site: Calvert Cliffs  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 02/25/1993
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20034G097 List:
References
50-317-93-02, 50-317-93-2, 50-318-93-02, 50-318-93-2, NUDOCS 9303090063
Download: ML20034G098 (2)


Text

-

~

r I

APPENDIX A Notice of Violation Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Docket / License Nos. 50-317; DPR-53 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 50-318; DPR-69 l

During an NRC inspection conducted from January 3,1993 through February 6,1993, I

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, the l

following violations were identified.

i i

l 1.

Technical Specification 6.8.1.g requires that the amount of overtime worked by plant j

staff members performing safety related functions must be limited in accordance with j

the NRC Policy Statement on Working Hours (Generic Letter 82-12).

I Generic Letter 82-12 states, in part, that an individual should not be permitted to l

work more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> in any seven day period (excluding shift turnover time)

J without prior approval.

Calvert Cliffs Instruction (CCI)-159, "Use of Overtime, step III.A.I.d states that an individual should not be permitted to work more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> in any seven day i

I period. CCI-159 step III.b states that deviations from this guideline shall be preapproved in writing by the Plant General Manager or the individual's l

Superintendent or General Supervisor.

]

Contrary to the above, during spent fuel handling crane testing between January 4 -

1 19, 1993, two test coordinators, two vendor technical representatives, and one 1

i electrician exceeded 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of work in a seven day period without proper i

authorization.

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

]

1 2.

Technical Specification 6.8.1.a requires that written procedures shall be established, j

implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in l

Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978.

a Regulatory Guide 1.33 requires administrative procedures for procedure adherence i

and temporary change me' hod and for procedure review and approval.

l.

I Contrary to the above, between January 4 - 19,1993, spent fuel handling crane testing was not conducted in accordance with written procedures as evidenced in the q

following examples:

i.

a.

Three engineering test procedure (ETP) changes were screened by a procedure 3

9303090063 930225 PDR ADOCK 05000317 G

PDR

- -. _. - - _ ~. -

4 4

t Appendix A 2

i screener who was not certified in accordance with PR-1-102, " Certification of Qualified Reviewers and Procedure Screeners." The use of an uncertified j

procedure screener was contrary to the requirements of PR-1-101, j

" Preparation and Control of Calvert Cliffs Technical Procedures."

i b.

During ETP 92-129, load testing for the crane continued even though the procedure could not be performed as written due to the physical configuration f

of the spent fuel pool area. The continued testing of the crane was contrary to the requirements of Calvert Cliffs Instruction (CCI) 132, " Requirements for i

j Implementation, Use, and Record Keeping of ETPs," which requires that the f

]

test coordinator shall stop the test and affected plant equipment shall be placed l

in the condition as directed by the shift supervisor when the test cannot be l

performed as written.

j i

j c.

During ETP 92-131, a method other than that specified in the procedure was l

jl used to set the load cell on the main hook. The use of an unapproved method i

of setting the load cell was contrary to the requirements of the ETP and CCI 132.

l i

i j

d.

Several test personnel, including a vendor technical representative, the crane j

operators, and a test coordinator, involved in the testing did not attend a pre-j evolution briefing as required by the ETPs, CCI 132, and CCI 140, " Conduct l

of Operations," which requires that all personnel involved in an evolution, i

i even those with minimal involvement, shall attend the pre-evolution brief.

l j

Any persons not attending the brief that need to become involved in the evolution shall be properly briefed prior to beginning any involvement in the j

evolution.

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

i l

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l

Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the l

Regional Administrator, Region I, 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 the violation, (2) the

]

corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that i

will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be l

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

time.

l l

2 i

e

,,-,e-

-