IR 05000461/1986065

Errata to Insp Rept 50-461/86-65,consisting of Corrected Page 28

ML20214X168
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	12/04/1986
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20214X148	List: IR 05000461/1986065 ML20214X145 ML20214X159
References
50-461-86-65, NUDOCS 8612100579
Download: ML20214X168 (1)

Text

o

,

ALTERATIONS was Action Statement No. 25. The performance of Action Statement 29 (suspend CORE ALTERATIONS) was considered appropriate by the licensee based on the instructions contained within the action statement. When core alterations were suspended, Action Statement 25 (establish SECONDARY CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY with the standby gas treatment system operating within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />) was no longer required. The inspector noted through discussions with cognizant licensee personnel that a technical specification revision was being requested to clarify the applicability of Action Statement No. 29 in Technical Specification Table 3.3.2-1. This will remain an Open Item pending the .

inspector's review of the licensee's revised technical specifications (461/86065-08(DRP)).

The licensee revised surveillance procedure CPS No. 9056.01 by use of Temporary Procedure Deviation (TPD) 86-1261. This TPD R provided the necessary steps to restore channel B21-N691E to R service at about 10:00 a.m. on October 14, 1986; however, the R licensee failed to identify that the other channel (IB21-691A) R still had a transmitter simulator installed. With the transmitter simulator still installed on ATM 1821-691A, the licensee reentered specified condition CORE ALTERATIONS at 11:55 a.m. on October 14, 1986. Technical Specification 3. states in part: " Entry into an Operational Condition or other specified condition shall not be made unless the conditions for the Limiting Condition for Operation are met without reliance on provisions contained in the Action requirements." Entry into specified condition CORE ALTERATIONS while not meeting Technical Specification Table 3.3.2-1, Instrument 1.j., minimum operable channel requirement of 2 is a violation of Technical Specification 3.0.4(461/86065-07C(DRP)).

The licensee identified that the transmitter simulator was still installed on ATM 1821-N691A at about 11:00 p.m. on October 14, 1986, and suspended core alterations. When the licensee removed the transmitter simulator from ATM 1821-N691A at 11:35 p.m. on October 14, 1986, isolation valves 11A005 and 11A008 automatically actuated shut. This was an unnecessary ESF actuation since a temporary Procedure Deviation could have been used similar to that used for channel B21-N691E. The inspector noted that a control room log entry, which may have been made after the transmitter simulator was removed, identified the

" anticipated" closure of isolation valves, 11A005 and IIA 00 The licensee removed the transmitter simulator from ATM ,

1821-N691A under the verbal direction of the Shift Superviso '

When the transmitter simulator had been removed from ATM 1821-N691E eariler that day, the licensee had prepared a temporary procedure deviation (TPD 86-1261) to preclude the unnecessary actuation of isolation valves 11A005 and 11A00 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V states, in part: " Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the

%[N

28