ML16342D359

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Violation from Insp on 960513-28.Violation Noted: on 960702,licensee Identified Condition Adverse to Quality W/Respect to Lift Setpoints on Three of Five Units 1 Main Steam Safety Valves Tested & Did Not Take Prompt Action
ML16342D359
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon 
Issue date: 07/10/1996
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML16342D360 List:
References
50-275-96-12, EA-96-180, NUDOCS 9607120094
Download: ML16342D359 (4)


Text

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Docket:

50-275 License:

DPR-80 EA 96-180 During an NRC inspection conducted on May 13 through Hay 28, 1996, violations of NRC requirements were identified.

In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violations are listed below:

A.

10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, states, in part, that measures shall be established'o assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected.

Contrary to the above, on April 2,

1996, the licensee identified a

condition adverse to quality with respect to the lift setpoints on 3 of 5 Unit 1 main steam safety valves tested (main steam lead 1),

and did not take prompt action to determine whether the same condition existed on the main steam safety valves in main steam leads 2,

3 and 4.

Specifically, the main steam safety valves on main steam lead 2 were not tested until April 11,

1996, when 3 of 5 were found out-of-tolerance, and the main steam safety valves on main steam leads 3 and 4 were not tested until April 14,
1996, when 5 of 5 valves in main steam lead 3

and 1 of 5 valves in main steam lead 4 were found out-of-tolerance.

(01014)

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

B.

Diablo Canyon Technical Specification 3/4.7. 1, Table 3.7-2 requires, in part, that steam line safety valve lift settings be returned "Within +1%

following main steam line Code safety valve testing'."

Contrary to the above, on April ll, 1996, and on April 14, 1996, the licensee found main steam safety valves HSSV-223 and HSSV-14 out of tolerance by 1.4% and 1.2% respectively.

Following the testing, the licensee did not reset them within the allowed tolerance of +1% of the specified setting before returning them to an operable status.

(02014)

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Pacific Gas and Electric 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 IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas

76011, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice, 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 will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved.

Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addres'ses the required response.

If an adequate reply is not received within the time 9607i20094 9607i0 PDR ADOCK 05000275 8

PDR

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 will be given to extending the response time.

Because the response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction.

However, if it is necessary to include such information, it should clearly indicate the specific information that should not be placed in the

PDR, and provide the legal basis to support the request for withholding the information from the public.

Dated at Arlington, Texas this 10th day of July 1996