ML13323A606
| ML13323A606 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1979 |
| From: | Arenal A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. |
| To: | Crews J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13323A605 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910040097 | |
| Download: ML13323A606 (3) | |
Text
Southern California Edison Company P. 0. BOX 800 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE ROSEMEAD. CALIFORNIA 91770 A.ARENAL TELEPHONE VICE PRESIDNT 213-S72-1476 August 21, 1979 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Canission Office of Inspection and Enforceent Reaion V Suite 202, Walnut Creek Plaza 1990 North California Boulevard Walnut Creek, California. 94596 Attention:
J. L. Crews, Chief Reactor Cperations and Nuclear Support Branch Docket No. 50-206 San Onofre Unit 1
Dear Sir:
Reference:
Letter from USNRC (J. L. Crews) to SCE (J. B. Mbore) dated August 1, 1979.
Subject:
NRC Inspection -
San Onofre Unit 1 (I.E. Inspection Report No. 50-206/79-09)
The referenced letter presents your finding in connection with the NRC inspection of June 20 - 22, 1979.
Your letter states that certain of our activities apparently were not conducted in full conpliance with NRC require ments as set forth in the Notice of Violation in Appendix A to your letter.
Specifically, contrary to Technical Specification Table 4.1.1, the daily test of the Area Radiation Monitoring System was not performed on June 18, 1979 and, contrary to Technical Specification 6.8.2, certain station procedures were revised without required review of the document changes by OSRC.
The Notice of Violation categorized these items of noncoirpliance as infractions.
The purpose of this letter is to provide our response to the Notice of Violation in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.201, Part 2, 10 CFR as applicable.
The specific items of noncompliance and our responses are presented below.
Item 1 "Technical Specification Table 4.1.1, Item 18, indicates that a surveillance test on the area radiation monitors is to be per formed daily.
7 910040 0o'7
USNRC Page 2 Contrary to the above, on June 18, 1979, docc ents were not available to show that the referenced surveillance test was con ducted.
Response
- 1)
Corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved:
A review of pertinent procedures and records indicate that this was an isolated occurrence.
The corrective action taken is described below.
- 2)
Corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations:
To prevent a recurrence of this incident a system of test compliance review by the swing shift Watch Engineer has been initiated.
This review will assure that all tests required by the Technical Specifications and sta tion procedures are accomplished during each 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period.
The results of this review will be documnented in the Watch Engineer's log.
- 3)
The date when full cupliance will be achieved:
Full coipliance on this item has been achieved.
Item 2 "Technical Specification 6.8.2 states, "Each procedure and ad ministrative policy of 6.8.1 above and changes thereto shall be reviewed by the OSRC and approved by the Plant Manager prior to implementation."
Station Order S-A-109, "Station Docunents -
Preparation, Re vision and Review,"Section III, states in part, "Temnporary operating memoranders...
shall be prepared any tine there is a change made which significantly affects a station docunent.
These operating memorandums must be approved by the On-Site Review Conmittee."
Contrary to the above, Maintenance Procedures S-I-2.6 and S-1-1.59 were performed on October 17 & 18, 1978, respec tively, with significant changes in effect and without appropriate documient changes and reviews."
Response
- 1)
Corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved:
USNRC Page 3 The subject procedure revisions are being processed through normal review per Station Order S-A-109.
- 2)
Corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further viola tions:
A memorandum has been issued by the Station Superintendent to all department heads stressing the importance of proper review of procedure revisions.
In addition, all QA site personnel have been cautioned by the QA/QC Supervisor on the signi ficance of this ncident and the importance of ensuring that Station Order S-A-109 is complied with.
QA personnel have acknowledged an understanding of the circuristances.
- 3)
The date when full conpliance will be achieved.
Full compliance has been achieved.
Should you have any questions concerning the above response, please contact me.
Sincerely,