ML19247B300
| ML19247B300 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1979 |
| From: | Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parris H TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908080338 | |
| Download: ML19247B300 (4) | |
Text
W TE/24 4,.,'o, UNITED ?TATEs E 'f 3 y, ( [h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
\\ g" [/
C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 1M JULY
? O $79 cocket Nos. 50-259 50-260 ana 50-296 Mr. Hugh G. Parris llanger of Power Tennessee Valley Authority 500 A Chestnut Street, Tower II Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 Daar Mr. Parris:
t>. E : CROWNS FERRY UNITS NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 We are reviewing your submittal dated April 24, 1979 in response to IE Bulletin 79-08.
We have detemined that the additional infomation requested in the enclosure is necessary in onder to complete e sa fety evaluation.
We request that responses to the items in the enclosure be forwarded to this office within two weeks of your receipt of the enclosure, which was previously transmitted to you by telecopy.
Please contact William F. Kane at (301) 492-7745 if you require additional discussions or clarification regarding the infor 1ation requested.
Si ncerely,
/
Thomas A. Ippolito, hie, Operating Reactors ranc #3 Division of Operat ng Reactors Encl osure:
Request for Additional Infomation cc w/ enclosure:
See next page 009
- 3 0
't 1 J S.s 2 9 08 0 son 49080] 63 N
Mr. Hugh G. Parris Tennessee Valley Authority
-2 JULY 2 0 579 cc:
H. S. Sanger, Jr., Esquire General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue E 118 33 C Kncxville, Tennessee 37902 Mr. Dennis McCloud Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Chestnut Street, Tower II Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 Mr. E. G. Beasley Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue W 10C 131C Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Robert F. Sullivan U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 1863 Decatur, Alabama 35602 Athens Public Library South and Forrest
' Athens, Alabama 35611 O ) 0
/. o o 4//
w
_ _at Enclosure BROWNS FERRY l, 2 AND 3 REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IEB 79-08 Item No. 2 1.
Verify that your review considered initiation of containment isolation of all lines penetrating containment (including those designed to transfer potentially radioactive gases and liqui,ds gut of catainment) upon all automatic initiations or sarety injection.
2.
Provide a schedule for implementation of any changes that may be required and describe how ttley meet the requiremants of the Bulletin.
Item No. 4 1.
Clarify your response to indicate whether operators have been instructed to utilize other available information to initiate safety systems.
Pro-vide your schedule for completion of this action.
Item No. 5 1.
It is not clear from your response whether your review with respect to the action directed by item 5b included all operating procedures and training instructions. Amend your response to clarify this point.
2.
Provide a schedule for any actions on item 5 that have not yet been completed.
Item No. 6 1.
It is not clear from your response that safety related valve positioning requirements were reviewed to ensure proper operation of engineered safety features.
Please supplement your response to provide a corriitment to conduct this review and a schedule for completion.
2.
Please augment your resconse to indicate the extent to which oosition and locking device checks are performed for locked safety system valves.
3.
Your response did not clearly indicate that all accessible safety-related valves had been inspected to verify proper position.
Nor was a schedule for performing the position verification for all safety-related valves nrovided.
Please supplement your response to provide this information.
Dll q 'q c, p
jj Vi
BROWNS FERRY 1,2 & 3 Item No. 7 1.
Your response does not explicitly address the actions of isolation valves on resetting safety features instrumentation.
Provide assurance that inadvertent transfer of radioactive gases and liquids out of containment will not occur on resetting safety features instrumentation.
2.
Discuss the basis upon which continued operability is assured for those features designed to prevent inadvertent transfer of radioactive liquids and gases.
Item No. 8 i.
We u.iderstand from your response that operability is verified for redundant safety related systems prior to removal of any safety related system from service. Since you may be relying on prior operability verification within the current technical specification surveillance interval, operability should be further verified by at least a visual check of the system status to the extent practicable, prior to removing the redundant equipment from service. Please supple-ment your response to provide a commitment that you will revise your maintenance and test procedures to adopt this position.
2.
It is not clear from your response that all involved reactor operational personnel in the oncoming shift are explicitly notified about the status of systems removed from or returned to service.
Please indicate how this information is transferred at shift turnover.
l} ') 'l 0