IR 05000321/1980022
| ML19320B223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1980 |
| From: | Dance H, Rogers R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19320B222 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-80-22, 50-366-80-22, IEB-79-26, NUDOCS 8007100066 | |
| Download: ML19320B223 (5) | |
Text
a car
UNITED STATES
-
'h, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
$
REGION 11 e
,
o,
'[
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 b
%,
o ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
,
Report Nos. 50-321/80-22 and 50-366/80-22 Licensee: Georgia Power Company 270 Peachtree Street, NW Atlanta, GA 30303 Facility Name: Hatch I and 2 Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5 Inspection at Hatch near Baxley, Georgia Inspector:
i
/
_b
.5'- 2 7- @
R. F. Rogers /
/
Date Signed Approved by:_
C
/1+
- - 30 70 If. C. Dance,'Section Chief, RONS Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on April 12 - May 12, 1980 Areas Inspected
.
This inspection involved 94 inspector-hours on site in the areas of technical specification compliance, reportable occurrences, housekeeping, operator per-formance, overall plant operations, quality assurance practices, station and corporate management practices, corrective and preventative maintenance activi-ties, site security procedures, radiation control activities, IE Bulletics and surveillance activities.
Resulta
-
Of the twelve areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-
-
,
,
80071000 0
'
i
i
- -,
,
--
-
_-
-.
_
__.
.-
.
-.
.
.
]
&
DETAILS
.,
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
l
- M. Manry, Plant Manager
"
- T. Moore, Assistant Plant Manager l
- T. Greene, Assistant Plant Manager S. Baxley, Superintendent of Operations R. Nix, Superintendent of Maintenance C. Coggins, Superintendent of Engineering Services W. Rogers, Health Physicist / Radiochemist C. Belflower, QA Site Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit Interview
,
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 25 and May 9, 1980, with those person indicated in paragraph 1 above.
,
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
,
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items i
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection:
l S.
Plant Operations Review (Units 1 and 2)
The inspector periodically during the inspection interval reviewed shift logs and operations records, including data sheets, instrument traces, and i
records of equipment malfunctions. This review included control room logs, auxiliary logs, operating orders, standing orders, jumper logs and equipment
'
tagout records. The inspector routinely observed cperator alterness and demeanor during plant tours. During abnormal events, operator performance
and response actions were observed und evaluated. The inspector conducted random off-hours inspections during the reporting interval to assure that operations and security remained at an acceptable level. Shift turnovers were observed to verify that they were conducted in accordance with approved licensee procedures. The inspector had no further comments.
,
t
9
,
-
'2
..----. --..-
-
.,..
.. -
. -, - -., -
. -. -. -
- - -,.
=
-
.
.
-2-s 6.
Plant Tours (Units 1 and 2)
5.
The inspector conducted plant tours periodically during the inspection interval to verify that monitoring equipment was recording as required, equipment was properly tagged, operations personnel were aware of plant conditions, and plant housekeeping efforts were adequate. The inspector also determined that appropriate radiation controls were properly established, critical clean areas were being controlled in accordance with procedures, excess equipment or material is stored properly and combustible material and debris were disposed of expeditiously. During tours the inspector looked for the existence of unusual fluid leaks, piping vibrations, pipe hanger and seismic restaint settings, various valve and breaker positions, equipment caution and danger tags and component positions, adequacy of fire fighting equipment, and instrument calibration dates. Some tours were
'
conducted on backshifts and weekends. The inspector had no further comments.
7.
Technical Specification Compliance (Units 1 and 2)
.
During this reporting interval, the inspector verified compliance with selected limiting conditions for operation (LCO's) and results of selected surveillance tests These verifications were accomplished by direct observa-tion of monitoring instrumentation, valve positions, switch positions, and review of completed logs and records. The licensee's compliance with selected LCO action statements were reviewed on selected occurrences as they happened.
8.
Physical Protection (Units 1 and 2)
The inspector verified by observation and interview during the reporting interval that measures taken to assure the physical protection of the facility met current requirements. Areas inspected included the organi-zation of the security force, the establishment and maintenance of gates, doors and isolation zones in the proper condition, that access control and badging was proper, that search practices were appropriate, and that escorting and communications procedures were followed.
9.
Followup on IE Bulletins (Units 1 and 2)
'
For the following Bulletins, the inspector verified that the response was timely, included the required information, contained adequate commitments and that corrective action as described in the written responses was com-pleted.
a.
IEB 79-26, Boron Loss from BWR Control Blades The inspector reviewed the licensee's responses to this Bulletin dated January 4, February 13, and February 25, 1980. The licensee conducted shutdown margin tests on both units in December 1979 and January 1980 i
._
e
t
.~.m
~, -.-...__;
-
__.___.m
-
-.-
- -
_.
., _ _
.
.
L-3-to verify that full withdrawal of a control blade would not result in
'
criticality on either Unit 1 or 2.
This item will remain open pending
.
a destructive examination of the most highly exposed blade.
b.
IEB 79-12, Short Period Scrams at BWR Facilities The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to this Bulletin dated July 26, 1979. The licensee had modified his startup procedures to incorporate restrictions on rod movement to reduce the possibility of high notch worths. Also, appropriate procedural precautions have been added to minimize the potential for a short period scram.
This item is closed.
IEB 78-09, BWR Drywell Leakage Paths Associated with Inadequate Closure.
c.
The Unit 2 procedure has been modified to agree with the previously accepted Unit 1 procedure (HNP-1-6705). This item is now closed for both units.
d.
IEB 78-14, Deterioration of Buna-N components in ASCO Solenoids Unit I components were replaced in July 1979 and Unit 2 components were replaced in April 1980. Plant procedures now require rebuilding these valves every five years to be within the seven year service life limit. This item is closed.
IEB 79-23, Potential Failure of Emergency Diesel Generator Field e.
Exciter Transformer The inspector reviewed the licensee's responses to this Bulletin dated October 24, 1979 and March 4, 1980. No ground or neutral connections have been made between low KVA rated transformers and high KVA rated Emergency Diesel Generators. All emergency diesels have completed the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> load test described in the Bulletin. This item is closed.
f.
IEB 79-24, Frozen Lines The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to this Bulletin dated October 25, 1979 and determined that the licensee has an adequate program to assure that safety related systems are not subject to freezing temperatures. Plant procedure HNP-1-6912, " Cold Weather Checks", implements appropriate precautionary measures.
g.
IEB 80-1, Operability of ADS Valve Pneumatic Supply The inspector reviewed the licensee's response dated January 22, 1980 l
with the following findings. The ADS Pneumatic Supply System is seismic category I both inside and outside the containment through the compressor receiver tank. Also the nitrogen make-up system for the
,
'
drywell and the instrument mir system provide redundancy to the pnen-
)
_
matic supply system. These two backup systems are also seismic I and
-
.f l
k
,
,
._ _
-._
_
. _..
_ _ _ _ _
_ _.. - -._
_
__
_
__-
_
l l
.
j
.
-4-l 5
.
i class IE powered. Due to the redundancy of the air supply systems at
!
Hatch, the reliability on the ADS accumulator check valves is not as safety significant as at other plants. The licensee has committed to
..
i testing, repairing and ultimately replacing the hard seat valves currently installed with the soft seat type. This item is closed.
.
i h.
IEB 80-2, Inadequate Quality Assurance for Nuclear Supplied Equipment
)
'
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response dated April 16 and
May 1, 1980 which essentially answered the questions asked in the Bulletin. Unit I currently has feedwater spargers and thermal sleeves
<
i manufactured by Marvin Engineering Company and Unit 2 doesn't. This
.
Item is closed.
!
i j
i.
IEB 80-03, Loss of Charcoal from Standard Type II, 2 inch, Tray Absorber Cells i
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response dated March 21, 1980 i
i and noted that the required visual inspections had been performed and
'
that appropriate data had been provided. This item is closed.
'
,
i l
!
$
t
.
e
~. 4'
i
_
_7__---.
_...
_ _ _
.
_
_
_
_.
_ _ --
,
_