IR 05000321/1986017
| ML20207K855 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1986 |
| From: | Holmesray P, Ignatonis A, Nejfelt G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207K839 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-86-17, 50-366-86-17, NUDOCS 8607300079 | |
| Download: ML20207K855 (5) | |
Text
.i i
i
,
-
'
UNITED STATES
[SO Crog,,b
'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'
o
~
'
'
[
REGION li n
y j
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323
49.....,o Report Nos.:
50-321/86-17 and 50-366/86-17
.
Licensee: Georgia Power Company ATTN:
Mr. J. H. Miller President P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket Nos.:
50-321 and 50-366 License Nos.:
DPR-57 and NPF-5 Facility Name:
Hatch I and 2 Inspection Date : May 31,, June 30, 1986 7!/C/Eb Inspectors:
u WW T
-
P.11e mdi-Ra, enior Resident' Inspector 06te Signed ( h<d vvush fv 7//s/r&
G. 'H. N(Jfelg, a ident Insp cto'r D' ate S'igned 7!/f b
Approved by:
JAdd W wtw A. J. Ign@tonis, Chief, Project Section 38 0' ate Signed Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY
-
,
Scope: This routine inspection was conducted at the site in the areas of Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters, 0perational Safety Verification,
.
Maintenance Observation, Plant Modification and -Surveillance Observation, and Reportable Occurrences.
>
.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
)
.
,
<<
q e
_{o
,'
d
.
,
e
.t
+
8607300079 860716 PDR ADOCK 0500
G
)
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees H. C. Nix, Site General Manager
- T. Greene, Deputy Site General Manager H. L. Sumner, Operations Manager
- T. Seitz, Maintenance Manager T. R. Powers, Engineering Manager R. W. Zavadoski, Health Physics and Chemistry Manager
- A. Fraser, Site Quality Assurance (QA) Manager C. T. Moore, Training Manager S. B. Tipps, Superintendent of Regulatory Compliance
- W. B. Thigpen, Senior QA Field Representative
- C. R. Goodman, Senior Regulatory Compliance Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview (30703)
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 3,1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee did not identify c
as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspectors
.
during this inspection. The licensee acknowledged the findings and took no exception.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)
(Closed) Violation 50-366/85-34-03 - Failure to use the correct procedure, while performing high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) system surveillance.
Georgia Power Company letter of response dated February 17, 1986, for this violation was reviewed and was determined to be acceptable by Region II.
The inspector verified the licensee's corrective actions.
(Previously Opened) Unresolved Item 50-321,366/86-09-02 - Concerns related to the control of onsite lubricants and chemicals.
The Inspector has reviewed this item and has determined that more effort is required for its resolution.
(Closed)
Inspector Followup Item, 50-321,366/TI2515/77 - Survey of licensee's response to selected safety issues. The survey exceptions that were noted were:
that the HPCI and reactor core isolation coolant (RCIC)
system rooms were inspected once per day in accordance with procedures,
. -.
.
_ _
._-
..
-
...
!
.
.
i 34GO-0PS-030-1S, Revision 1, and 34GO-0PS-030-2S, Revision 0; and these rooms are not monitored for humidity. The survey indicated that these rooms should be inspected each shift and monitored for humidity.
4.
Operational Safety Verification (71707)
The inspectors kept themselves informed on a daily basis of the overall plant status and any significant safety matters related to plant operations.
Daily discussions were held with plant management and various members of the plant operating staff. The inspectors made frequent visits to the control
room. Observations included instrument readings, setpoints and recordings, status of operating systems, tags and clearances on equipment, controls and switches, annunciator alarms, adherence to limiting conditions for opera-tion, temporary alterations in effect, daily journals and data sheet entries, control room manning, and access controls.
This inspection
,
activity included numerous informal discussions with operators and their i
supervisors.
Weekly, when on site, selected Engineering Safety Feature (ESF) systeins were confirmed operable.
The confirmation was made by verifying the following: accessible valve flow path alignment, power supply breaker and fuse status, instrumentation, major component leakage, lubrica-l tion, cooling, and general condition.
General plant tours were conducted on at least a biweekly basis. Portions of the Control Building, Turbine Building, Reactor Building and outside'
areas were visited. Observations included safety related tagout verifica-tions, shift turnover, sampling program, housekeeping and general plant conditions, fire protection equipment, control of activities in progress, radiation protection controls, physical security, problem identification systems, and containment isolation.
In the course of the monthly activities, the Resident Inspectors included a review of the licensee's physical security program.
The performance of
various shifts of the security force was observed in the conduct of daily activities to include: protected and vital access controls, searching of
,
personnel, packages and vehicles, badge issuance and retrieval, escorting of
'
visitors, patrols and compensatory posts.
In addition, the Resident i
Inspectors observed protected area lighting, protected and vital areas i
barrier integrity and verified an interface between the security organiza-
tion and operations or maintenance.
Specifically, the Resident Inspectors i
verified the licensee Daily Security Reports for May 31, 1986 and June 1, 1986.
These reports were found to be maintained as required by procedure, i
33SS-SEC-002-5S, Revision 2.
5.
Maintenance Observation (62703)
'
During the report period, the inspectors observed selected maintenance activities.
The observations included a review of the work documents for adequacy, adherence to procedure, proper tagouts, adherence to technical
f l
'
e
.
specifications, radiological controls, observation of all or part of the actual work and/or retesting in progress, specified retest requirements, and adherence to the appropriate quality controls.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Plant Modification and Surveillance Testing Observations (37700 & 61726)
The inspectors observed the performance of selected surveillances and plant modification Design Change Requests (DCRs).
The observation included a review of the procedure and/or DCR for technical adequacy, conformance to Technical Specifications, verification of test instrument calibration, observation of all or part of the actual surveillances, removal from service and return to service of the system or components affected, and review of the data for acceptability based upon the acceptance criteria.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
ESF System Walkdown (71710)
The inspectors routinely conducted partial walkdowns of ESF systems. Valve and breaker / switch lineups and equipment conditions were randomly verified both locally and in the control room to verify that the lineups were in accordance with licensee requirements for operability and equipment material conditions were satisfactory.
During the inspection period, a Unit-2 Standby Liquid Control System (SBLC) walkdown was performed.
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Reportable Occurrences (90712 & 92700)
The following Licensee Event Report, (LERs) were reviewed for potential generic impact, to detect trends, and to determine whether corrective actions appeared appropriate.
Events which were reported immediately were also reviewed as they occurred to determine that Technical Specifications were being met and the public health and safety were of utmost considera-tion.
The following LERs are considered closed.
Unit-1:
86-21.
Unit-2:
86-11.
9.
Onsite Followup of Events (93702)
On June 12, 1986, with Unit-1 at power, the licensee identified that the primary containment purge and inverting 18" vent line valves, IT48-F319 and-F320, failed a local leak rate test (LLRT) performed that day.
Conse-quently, Unit-1 was taken to cold shutdown, as required by Technical Specification 3.7.A.8.
This problem was found due to the licensee's initiative to investigate why the drywell pressure remained constant, rather than increasing as expected, with the venting of nitrogen into the drywell.
__
,
,
.
.-
On June 28,1986 at 1039 EDT, while inserting control rods for the purpose of shutting down, the Unit-2 reactor scrammed from approximately 27% power due to low reactor water level. The low level scram was caused by a trip of the running reactor feed pump following a trip of the condensate booster pumps. The condensate booster pumps tripped on low suction pressure caused by the shutting of the steam jet air ejector intercondensers flow control valve. The result of'this valve shutting was to direct all flow through the intercondensers which produced a low suction pressure condition at the condensate booster pumps. The cause of the flow control valve shutting was determined to be a plugged air port in the pneumatic controller. The air port was cleared and the valve then functioned normally. No emergency core cooling system setpoints were reached.
Reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) was used to restore reactor level to +25 inches and the control cod drive pump was then able to maintain level.