IR 05000327/1980039
| ML20002C270 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1980 |
| From: | Dance H, Julian C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002C260 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-327-80-39, NUDOCS 8101090849 | |
| Download: ML20002C270 (5) | |
Text
.
/ re aro,#'o, o
UNITEC STATES E'-
' f, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
{
cE REGION 11
101 MAHIE TT A ST,, N.W., Sulf E 3100 o,g
,o#
AT L AN T A, G E ORGI A 303o3
.....
v Report No. 50-327/80-39 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 500A Chestnut Street Tower II Chattanooga, TN 37401 Facility Name: Sequoyah Unit 1 Docket No. 50-327 License No. DPR-77 Inspection at Sequoyah Site near Chattanooga, Tennessee Inspector:
b'
C ';-1
/8/2-i/I[
C. Jp ian '/
~Dat Si ned Approved by:
$ML
// 29 N 11. C. Dance', Section Chief, RONS Branch Date ' Signed SUMMARY Inspection on September 16-19, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine unannounced inspection involved 28 inspector-hours on~;ite in the areas of on-site followup of licensee event reports.
Results Of the areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was found.
9101090 W
__ _
_ -.
.
.
!
.
,
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. M. Ballentine, Plant Superintendent
,
- J. R. Bynum, Assistant to Plant Superintendent
'
- L. H. Coots, Compliance Administration H. Gelston, Compliance Administration G. Kirk, Compliance Administration D. Roberts, Compliance Administration J. M. McGriff, Maintenance Supervisor (I)
W. A. Watson, Maintenance Supervisor (E)
- W. J. Glasser, Quality Assurance Coordinator
- T. L. Howard, Quality Assurance Other licensee employees contacted included numerous technicians, operators, security force members and office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspector
- S. D. Butler
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 19 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. The inspector explained the one item of noncompliance and the four inspector followup items. Licensee representatives acknowledged the findings and stated that reporting improve-ment will be achieved with the formation of a compliance group to coordinate Sequoyah reports.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings l
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Review of Licensee Event Reports The inspector met with licensee representatives from the Compliance group.
A general discussion was held on Licensee Event Report (LER) reporting requirements and the licensee's past LER performance.
- _ - _ - - -
_
-_
,
.
.
_
.
.
-2-LER's 80-01 through 80-151 excluding 88, 113, 144, 148 and 150 had been reviewed by the inspector in the NRC Region II Office and by the resident inspectors on a day by day basis. The resident inspectors conducted on-site followup as needed promptly after each occurrence. The inspector discussed specific reports with licensee representatives to clarify circumstances of the event, determine progress of subsequent corrective actions and determine the adequacy of actions taken to prevent recurrence. The following discre-pancies were noted.
Twenty-six LER's were submitted late as listed below:
LER Number Type Event Date Report Due Date Report Submitted 80-33 30 day 4/11/80 5/12/80 5/15/80 80-39 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> 4/27 4/28 5/2 80-40 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> 5/31 6/2 6/10 80-44 30 day 5/9 6/9 6/11 80-60 30 day 5/21 6/20 8/28 80-65 30 day 4/30 5/30 6/23 80-73 30 day 5/20 6/19 6/23 80-79 30 day 7/16 8/15 8/19 80-89 30 day 6/9 7/9 7/14 80-94 30 day 6/20 7/21 8/27 80-96 30 day 6/29 7/29 8/4 80-112 30 day 6/23 7/23 7/31 80-115 30 day 6/23 7/23 7/31 80-116 14 day 7/11 7/25 7/29 80-120 30 day 6/12 7/14 7/28 80-126 30 day 6/27 7/28 8/13 80-127 30 day 6/30 7/30 8/13 80-128 30 day 7/1 7/31 8/13 80-130 30 day 7/9 8/8 8/18 80-131 30 day 6/26 7/28 8/13 80-134 30 day 7/5 8/4 8/14 80-135 30 day 7/11 8/11 8/14 80-136 30 day 7/16 8/15 8/19
,
'80-141 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> 8/29 9/1 9/2 80-142 30 day 7/18 8/18 9/2 80-146 30 day 6/30 7/30 9/8 Technical Specification 6.9.1.11 requires that Reportable Occurrences shall be reported to the NRC in accordance with the time requirements set forth in Technical Specifications 6.9.1.12 (Prompt Notification with Written Followup) and 6.9.1.13 (Thirty Day Written Reports). The failure to make a
,
'
timely submittal of the reports listed above is an item of noncompliance.
(327/80-39-01)
Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.4 requires that all diesel generator failures shall be reported to the Commission and that the report shall include the information recommended in Regulatory Position C.3.b of Regulatory Guide 1.108,
.
.
.
-3-
.
Revision 1, August 1977. The following LER's dealt with diesel generator problems and did not include all of the information required by Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.4.
80-23 an-129 80-42 80-132 80-63 80-140 80-74 80-143 80-87 80-145 These instances of incomplete reporting are another example of the previously described item of noncompliance. (327/80-39-01) These additional reporting requirements for diesel generator LER's were discussed by the inspectors.
Licensee representatives stated that supplementary reports will be submitted to include the required information and that future diesel gererator reports will meet this requirement.
The inspector discussed selected LER's with appropriate plant personnel.
Plant equipment and procedures were examined to verify that the stated corrective action has been accomplished. Work is still in progress on the following items. These are considered inspector followup items and will be reviewed during a future inspection.
a.
LER's 80-22, 80-41 and 80-118 were repeat events of the upper and lower containment air radiation monitors becoming inoperable due to the sample line containment isolation valves closing on loss of control air pressure. Licensee representatives stated that the exact cause has not been determined, however it is believed that the cause is a drop in non-essential air system pressure due to abrupt high demands from construction use on Unit 2.
The isolation valves are presently supplied from the non-essential air system. A design change is under review to supply the isolation valve control air from the essential air system. Meanwhile, tighter administrative controls will be used to limit the sudden high volume uses of nonessential air for construc-tion activities. (327/80-39-02)
b.
LER 80-40 reported the discovery that the 6900 volt safety injection pump circuit breakers will lock out as a protective feature if given a close signal when a trip condition is present. A local reset action is required to clear the lock out and the condition is not annunicated in the control room.
The inspector expressed concern that if such a lock out occurs the operator would have no indication that the piece of equipment is inoperatic and not ready for immediate use.
Licensee representatives stated that a design change is in progress to correct this situation. The inspector stated that this will be examined during the next inspection. (327/80-39-03)
c.
The inspector expressed concern over the number of LER's involving various radiation monitors becoming inoperable. Licensee representa-tives stated that they have a program in progress to implement design
_ _..
.
,
-. _
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
-4-changes to correct generic problems with the various monitors. The inspector stated that his are will be closely reviewed during a future inspection. (327/80-39-04)
d.
LER 80-71 reported that a rupture disc was found broken on a boric acid evaporator. The report stated that this could have allowed back flow from the waste gas system to escape to the evaporator room atmos-phere because there is no check valve in the evaporator off-gas line.
Licensee representatives stated that a design change is in progress to install a check valve in this line to prevent a potential gaseous release. The inspector stated that the progress of this design change will be examined during a future inspection. (327/80-09-05)
i (
l
L