05000327/LER-1985-001, :on 850109,Surveillance Instruction 143, Control Bldg Emergency Air Cleanup Sys Filter Train Test, Not Performed within Tech Spec Time Limits.Surveillance Instruction Completed Satisfactorily on 850109

:on 850109,Surveillance Instruction 143, Control Bldg Emergency Air Cleanup Sys Filter Train Test, Not Performed within Tech Spec Time Limits.Surveillance Instruction Completed Satisfactorily on 850109

ML20106F429
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	02/08/1985
From:	Duggin G, Wallace P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
LER-85-001, LER-85-1, NUDOCS 8502130544
Download: ML20106F429 (4)

LER-1985-001, on 850109,Surveillance Instruction 143, Control Bldg Emergency Air Cleanup Sys Filter Train Test, Not Performed within Tech Spec Time Limits.Surveillance Instruction Completed Satisfactorily on 850109

Event date:
Report date:
3271985001R00 - NRC Website

text

{{#Wiki_filter:, u.S. NUCLEAR REouLATORY -- I.QP.e. See APPnOvt 3 Oess seO. sie0-cio4 a e ""'8''" LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) DOCKET IRheeCR 42) PAGE(E 7ACILITY NAast (Il Sequoyah, Unit 1 o 15 l 0 t o l o 131217 1 lOFl0 l 3 fl7LE (48 Surveillance Instruction Not Performed Within Time Limits EVENT DATE IS) LER NutISER {S) REPORT DATE (73 OTHER FACILITIES INVOLVED 10) MONTH DAY YEAR YEAR [M ' 7M MONTH DAY YEAR F AOLITV N AMES DOCKET NUMetnist Sequoyah Unit 2 015l0 j o g ol313 8 0l1 0 l9 8 5 8l 5 0 l 0l1 0l0 0l2 0 l8 8l5 0 1 51 0 1 0 1 0 I I THIS REPORT 18 $USMITTED PUROUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 9: (Cae,4 eae er more of the 4 Ap**wl (11) OPE RATING "I* 00.734eH2,fie) 73.71th) 1 20 40216) to 406(el 20.405teH1H4 00.3steH1) 30.73(eH2Hvl 73.711st R no. 1 i 0i0 v oi. Hine g,f;;y,7,,gg;,,

==H2 H2n. y 80 73tell2 til 80.73(eH2Hvel4HAl J85A1 20.405teH1Hout 20.406teH1Hwi 80.73deH21(ill 00.73teH2Hv6iiHS) 20.405(eH1Hvl 80.73 del (2ilHQ 90.73(eH2Hal LICENSEE CCNTACT FOR THIS LER n2) NAME TELEPHONE NUMSER AREA CODE Glenn Duggin, Compliance Section Engineer 6l 5 8, 7, 0, i 6: 1 4 l 6 g i i COMPLETE ONE LINE FOR EACM COWPONENT FAILURE DESCRISED IN TMit REPORT 113) MANgNC. R {o h,T A OR M^*N'g,AC. R 8 CAU$E SYSTEM COMPONENT y ns

CAUSE

sv5 TEM COMPONENT y ON I I I I I I l l t I i l l t I l l l l l l l l l l l l l $UPPLEMENTAL REPORT EXPECTED (141 MONTH DAY YEAR 50 Burs $ ION T ES fit,an. temere,e EXPECTED $USMt35 TON DA Til 40 l l l A TR ACT a,,~,,e,,o0 , e. e,e.. e., ar ,,,M , o, n ei During a review of the surveillance instruction scheduling files, it was discovered that surveillance instruction (SI) 143, " Control Building Emergency Air Cleanup System Filter Train Test," had not been performed within the technical specification time limits. The SI was in: mediately scheduled for performance and completed satisfactorily on 01/09/85. b 8502130544 850208 PDR ADOCK 05000327 S PDR =R,Cg.. m

seRC Form 355A. U.S. NUCLEMI ? EIULATORY COMMISSION f LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONT;NUATION 's;reRovio ous No. 3tso-cie E XPIR ES. 8/31/85 FACILITY NAME Ill DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER NUMBER (g) PAGE (3) II YEAR Sequoyah, Unit 1 o l5jojojol3[2 l7 q5 0l 0 l1 -- 0l0 0p OF 0l3 TlxT iM more space to requent une exaonalNRC form 366Ksl (11) During a review of the surveillance instruction scheduling files on January 9,1985, it I was discovered that surveillance instruction (SI) 143, " Control Building Emergency Air. Cleanup System Filter Train Test," had not been performed within the technical specifi-cation time limits. SI-143 is performed on an 18-month surveillance interval. Due to a scheduling error, the scheduled date was October 10, 1984, with the maximum allowable performance date being March 2,1985. The review of SI-143 on January 9 revealed that the scheduled date should have been June 12, 1984, with the maximum allowable extension date of November 2,1984. The SI was immediately scheduled for performance and completed satisfactorily on January 9, 1985. The event was discovered at 1330C on 01/09/85 while unit 1 was in mode 1 (100% power, 2250 psig, 578 degrees F) and unit 2 was in mode 1 (80% power, 2250 psig, 574 degrees F). The technical specification surveillance requirements (SR) met by performance of sis are performed within specified time intervals. These time intervals are allowed to be extended up to 25 percent of the surveillance interval for any one performance, while the combined time interval for any three consecutive performances (surveillance intervals) should not exceed 3.25 times the specified surveillance interval. The SI is scheduled to be performed based on the initial performance and the specified surveillance interval. Due to the 25 percent extension allowed by technical specifications, some SI actual dates may be up to four and one-half months later than the original scheduled date, based on an 18-month surveillance interval. The total accumulated extension time allowed for three consecutive sis cannot exceed 25 percent of one surveillance interval. SI-143 was not performed within the maximum allowed extension because the scheduled date was incorrectly calculated. The use of actual performance dates, rather than previously scheduled dates, to calculate the next performance date caused the allowed extension date to be miscalculated. As explained above, an SI performance may have an actual performance date later than the scheduled date. The use of actual dates for scheduling would thus have an accumulative effect and, by the third performance of the SI, the 25 percent extension could be exceeded. Scheduling personnel had incorrectly calculated the maximum allowable performance date to be March 2,1985, and the scheduled performance date to be October 10, 1984. This miscalculation resulted from incorrectly using the last actual performance date of April 13, 1983. The scheduled date should have been based on the last scheduled date and not the actual performance date. The correctly calculated schedule date should have been June 12, 1984, with the maximum allowable extension date of November 2,1984. Scheduling personnel did not realize the accumulative effect of allowing an SI to be performed near the end of the 25 percent extension in consecutive performances. The 1.25 date (25 percent extension) is calculated for scheduling purposes, and the plant date assigned to be done is a small fraction of the 1.25 date. The use of actual performance dates instead of schedule dates for doing schedule performance date calcu-lations was discontinued in 1983. NIC POIM 3MA M

c NRC Form 20tA : U.S. NUCLEA:t kE1ULATORY COMMIS$10N Y'! LICENTEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION

- m ROVED OM8 NO. 3150-0104 EXPIRES: 8/31!85 FACILITV NAME (Il DOLEET NUMBER (2)

LER NUMBER (S) PAGE (3) IE 'q^' YEAR g g, Sequoyah,. Unit 1 oyago[3fy 7 8l5 0l0 l1 0;O Ol3 0l3 OF o 5 TEXT IImore spece in requeet use endeonelNRC Form 366Kal(1h To prevent a similar occurrence in the future, a standard form to calculate and document maximum allowable extension dates has been initiated. Further corrective actions which are in progress are: (1) Instruct all personnel involved.in SI scheduling -to use the correct method and procedure, (2) Revise the section instruction letter (SIL) for SI scheduling to include details of calculating maximum allowable performance dates and the standard. form used to evaluate and document date calculations, and (3) ' Review all current and future scheduled performances of greater.than 9-month sis to verify use of previous scheduled dates rather than actual performance dates in. calculating future-schedule dates. Any other sis found to have passed their maximum allowed performance dates will also be reported per technical specification requirements. There was no effect on public health or safety. Previous occurrences - one (SQRO-50-327/85003). 1 NIC DOW 36eA tiTfD

hy:n= ;=w :- m, ~ 't; s =- "7}.pe, #'i J .7,[ [ ' y q y+ ~.u _ ' ya. v e 3:43.;~ s, x-g . :.TENN ESSEE. VALLEY' AUTHORITY 1 g;c ?? ll.

. A n Sequoyah Nuclear-Planti

- i.

' ' Pos t. Office,Bois. 2000.-

t.

4 ,P - :<i SoddytDaisybTennessee-f37379 <h y ^ 5; / +:.. [ February l8[1985) ,s. v

- f_ --

i + g ~ ~. ~ ,,. ~ (U.S. NucleariRegulatory. Commission $ y;f

. Document.Controll Desk <

, :Wasliington, DCh 20555:

Gentlemen

' i iTENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY - SEQUOYAR NUCLEARLPLANT T TT 1 - DOCKET NO. i

• 150-327 T--iFACILITY ~ OPERATING LICENSE DPR 77.J-' REPORIALLE ~ OCCURRENCE - REPORT <

SQRO-50-327/85001'- 1 y eiThe enclos'edilicenseeJevent report provides details.concerning.the failurei 4 to perform al surveillance-instruction'withinlthe technical specificationc + fallowed, time limits. This. event -is ; reported 'in~ accordance with 10 CFR 50.73,

paragraph. a'.2.ie.

Very truly yours, 1 TENNESSEE. VALLEY AUTHORITY. ...f,. ~ i .P.-:R.'Wallace

- Plant Manager-1 x

C Enclosure cc. (Enclosure):

James P..O_'Reilly, Director-

~ U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite'2900 101 Marietta Street, NW: ~~

- At1'anta,' Georgia. 30323

+ Records Center-Ins titute !o f. Nuclear Power; 0perations ? Suite:1500: i1100 Circle 75'Parkw'y? a . Atlanta,s Georgiat 130339: o s + u_ NRC Inspector, NUC.PR, ; Sequoyah - d

.=,

( f y 1 H ~ 'i [ 7 -{] f_f X 1 +

An Equal Opportunity Ernployer,-

~ w r{ * ; y_-- 4 ,O J,.. J:Zu L-m 4 y;p?E- }}