ML20215E457
| ML20215E457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1986 |
| From: | Brownlee V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215E450 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-86-46, NUDOCS 8612220313 | |
| Download: ML20215E457 (1) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i o
ENCLOSURE 1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Duke Power Company Docket No. 50-413 Catawba Unit 1 License No NPF-35 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on November 3-7, 1986, a violation of NRC requirements was identified. The viola-tion involved a failure to report information required by 10 CFR 50.59.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforce-ment Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1986), the violation is listed below:
10 CFR 50.59 states that the licensee may conduct tests not described in the safety analysis report, without prior Commission approval, unless the proposed test involves a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
It also states that the licensee shall furnish to the NRC annually or at such shorter intervals as may be specified in the license, a report containing a brief description of such tests including a summary of the safety evaluation of each.
Contrary to the above, although at least eight tests not described in the safety analysis report were performed in 1985, neither the licensee's 1985 annual report required by 10 CFR 50.59, dated July 1, 1986, nor other correspondence to the NRC included a brief description of the tests s
including a summary of the safety evaluation of each.
This violation applies to Unit 1 only.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplemen't I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Duke Power Company is hereby required to submit to this Office within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply including (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the violation if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, considera-tion will be given to extending the response time.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8612220313 EL61215 ADOCK0500g3 Virgil L. Brownlee, Chief PDR G
Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 15 day of December 1986