ML20210T290

Notice of Violation from Insp on 970630-0902.Violation Noted:Licensee Failed to Demonstrate That Condition of Sys Was Being Effectively Controlled Through Performance of Appropriate Preventive Maintenance

ML20210T290
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	09/10/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210T281	List: IR 05000361/1997015 ML20210T274 ML20210T290
References
50-361-97-15, 50-362-97-15, NUDOCS 9709150047
Download: ML20210T290 (2)

Text

.

l E LQillRill NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Southern California Edison Co. Docket Nos.

50 361;50 362 San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station License Nos.: NPF 10; NPF 15 i

During an NRC in=pection conducted on June 30 through September 2,1997, one l violation of NRC requirements was identified, in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG 1600, the violation is listed below:

10 CFR 50.65(a)(1) states,in part, that each holder of a license to operate a nuclear ,

plant shall monitor the performance of structures, systems, or components, against i licensee-established goals, in a manner sufficient to provide reasonable assurance i tnat such structures, systems, and components, as defined in paragraph (b), are 4 capable of fulfilling their intended functions. Such goals shall be established commensurate with safety and, where practical, take into account industry wide operbting experience.

10 CFR 50.65(a)(2) states,in part, that monitoring as specified in paragraph (a)(1)  ;

is not required where it has been demonstrated that the performance or condition of a structure, system or component is being effectively controlled through the performance of appropriate preventive meintenance, such that the structure, system or component remains capable of performing its intended function.

10 CFR 50.65(c) states that the requirements of this section shall be implemented by each licensee no later than July 10,1996.

Contrary to the above, as, of July 10,1996, the time when the licensee elected to not monitor the performance or condition of the reactor coolant system against licensee established goals pursuant to the requirements of Section (a)(1), the licensee failed to demonstrate that the condition of this system was being effectively controlled through the performance of appropriate preventive maintenance, such that the system remained capable of performing its intended function. Specifically, the licensee inadequately evaluated the appropriateness of the performance of preventive maintenance prior to placing the Unit 3 reactor coolant system under a 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2) category (i.e., the licensee did not consider in its evaluation the identification in 1995 of through wall cracking in four reactor coolant system nozzle penetrations, which represented multiple failures of the barrier function of the reactor coolant system).

This is a Severity LevelIV violation (Supplement 1)(50 362/9715 02).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Southern California Edison Co. 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 f acility that is the subject of this 9709150047 PDR 970910 '

0 ADOCK 05000361 pg

2-Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmittin0 this Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violatiom (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 Ato when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response, if an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, on 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 l not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Because your 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 you find it necessary to include such information, you should clearly indicate the specific information that you desire not to be placed in the PDR, and provide the legal basis to support your request for withholding the information from the public.

Dated at Arlington, Texas this 10th day of September 1997

.. .