05000395/LER-1982-005, Forwards LER 82-005/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Forwards LER 82-005/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

ML20065N887
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	10/15/1982
From:	Dixon O SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO.
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20065N889	List: 05000395/LER-1982-005, Forwards LER 82-005/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl 05000395/LER-1982-005-03, /03L-0:on 820916,five Smoke Detectors at 400-ft & 412-ft Elevations of Control Bldg Disabled,Rendering Preaction Sprinkler Sys Automatic Actuation Capability Inoperable.Caused by Need to Perform Welding in 400-ft Area
References
NUDOCS 8210220340
Download: ML20065N887 (3)

LER-1982-005, Forwards LER 82-005/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Event date:
Report date:
3951982005R00 - NRC Website

text

.

s SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY post oprics 7e4 COLUMe:A SouTM CAnoWNA 29218 O. W. DixON, JR.

No$e'd"o'.*e'..'rYou.

October 15, 1982 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II, Suite 3100 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 cp j;-

ro um

Subject:

Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Statibn

.I Docket No. 50/395 Vg Operating License No. NPF-12 Thirty Day Written Report m

$6 LER 82-005 p

c5 e ~.1 ff

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

cp On September 23, 1983, a telephone report and confirming Tdiex ~

was submitted to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II which stated that Technical Specification 3.7.9.2(e) had been violated.

This was the result of sr.oke detectors associated with the Preaction Sprinkler System on Elevation 400' of the control Building being removed for performance of maintenance in the area.

Subsequent investigation revealed that the Technical Specification Action Statement was met, in that there are no redundant systems or components in the same area, and a one hour fire watch patrol was being performed.

These additional facts were discussed with Messrs. Conlon, Miller, and Skolds on September 28, 1982, with all parties being in agreement that no violation to the Technical Specification had occurred.

Therefore, this letter constitutes a Thirty-Day Report as required by Technical Specification 6.9.1.13(b).

If there are any questions, please contact us at your convenience.

Very truly yours, l

O. W. Dix

, Jr.

ARK:OWD:dwf Attachment cc:

See Page Two 95 j[Ydd O

B210220340 821015 PDR ADOCK 05000395 PDR R

~~I~6Q

s Mr. James P. O'Reilly LER 82-005 Page Two October 15, 1982 cc:

V.C.

Summer T.C.

Nichols, Jr.

G.H.

Fischer O.W. Dixon, Jr.

H.N. Cyrus H.T.

Babb D.A.

Nauman M.B. Whitaker, Jr.

l W. A. Williams, Jr.

O.S.

Bradham R.B. Clary M.N.

Browne A.R.

Koon H. Radin Site QA C.L. Ligon (NSRC)

G.J. Braddick J.L.

Skolds 4

J.B.

Knotts, Jr.

B.A.

Bursey I&E (Washington)

Document Management Branch NPCF File

s Mr. James P.

O'Reilly LER No.82-005 Page Three October 15, 1982 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EVENT On September 16, 1982, with the plant operating in Mode 5, five (5) smoke detectors located on elevations 400' and 412' of the Control Building were disabled so that welding could be performed in the area without actuating the Preaction Sprinkler System for elevation 400'.

This action crec_ed a situation in which the Preaction Sprinkler System was not capable of automatic actuation.

PROBABLE CONSEQUENCES There were no adverse consequences because the Technical Specification Action Statement was complied with in that there are no redundant systems or components in the same area, and a one hour fire watch patrol was being performed.

CAUSE(S) OF THE OCCURRENCE Due to welding being performed in the area, the smoke detectors were removed to avoid tripping the deluge valve in the Sprinkler System.

IMMEDIATE CORRECTIVE ACTION

A one hour fire watch patrol was already being implemented for this area in accordance with inoperable fire barriers and Operating License Condition 2.C.18(b) for fire detectors.

Also, during the time frame that the maintenance was being performed a concurrent, continuous fire watch was provided with backup fire suppression equipment available.

ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE On September 22, 1982, the detectors were reinstalled, and the Sprinkler System was verified to be functional.

No further action is required.