ML19330C415

Licensee Response to TMI Alert 800707 Motion to Compel Response to Followup Interrogatories Re 800627 Leak.Licensee Not Obligated to Respond to Interrogatories 3 & 4.Related Correspondence.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19330C415
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	08/05/1980
From:	Blake E METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To:
Shared Package
ML19330C413	List: ML19330C412 ML19330C415
References
NUDOCS 8008080353
Download: ML19330C415 (9)

Text

.. . -. - -

n u.T cr :sm.:::ocE J(] Lic 8/5/80 ,;.,,

~~ (,h UNITED STATES OF AMERICA E . rF Y -'

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Cy __ '"In"/r '?I AL'G ad BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD iL cfjgp,,,7.330 , lt k A..r-f C.7 j,

NT &:rc.; l 'N

/

In the Matter of )

)

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) (Restart)

(Three Mile Island Nuclear )

. Station, Unit No. 1) )

LICENSEE'S RESPONSE TO TMIA MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE OF LICENSEE TO TMIA'S " FOLLOW-UP" INTERROGATORIES BASED ON THE JUNE 27 10,000 GALLON LEAK

'On July 7, 1980, Three Mile Island Alert ("TMIA") filed a document entitled "TMIA's Follow-Up Interrogatories Based On The 10,000 Gallon Leak of Contaminated Water On June 27, 1980 To Licensee." On July 17, Licensee objected to TMIA's July 7

" follow-up" interrogatories, on the ground that the interroga-tories do.not refer to a prior discovery responce of Licensee and the efore do not comply with the controlling Board order on

~

follow-on discovery. Licensee explained that, absent TMIA's-4 identification of such prior responses by Licensee, Licensee

, could not assess either the timeliness or relavance of TMIA's July 7 " follow-up" interrogatories. Licensee further stated that, . assuming that TMIA ' intended to treat the June 27 spill as c "new Linformation," Licensee still objected to the July 7

~' interrogatories as. irrelevant and overly broad.

'8008080358:

On July 26, 1980, TMIA moved to compel Licensee's response to the July 7 interrogatories. In its motion, TMIA explains that it mischaracterized the interrogatories as " follow-up" interrogatories and, as Licensee had theorized, intended to treat the June 27 incident as "new information" on which the July 7 interrogatories were based. TMIA also generally asserts

.the relevance of its July 7 interrogatories to its Contentions 5~and-7. However, TMIA fails totally to address Licensee's objection to the interrogatories as overbroad, or to explain, for example, how interrogatories like No. 2 - seeking five years of maintenance records - or No. 4 - asking Licensee to generate and evaluate possible scenarios - are not overbroad.

Licensee still objects to each of TMIA's July 7 interroga-

~

tories as overbroad and unrelated to TMIA's contentions. TMIA asserts that Interrogatories 1 and 2 are based upon its Contention 5. Contention 5, as admitted by the Board, alleges that during periods of normal TMI plant operation, required maintenance was. deferred to scheduled plant outages and that during those scheduled outages, maintenance workers were overworked. A spill at TMI-l in late June 1980 is unrelated to such a contention. However, the Board has expressed an interest in.-the general subject matter of TMIA's Contention 5,

" deferred maintenance." See, " Memorandum Order On TMIA's Motion To Compel Discovery of Licensee" (July 22, 1980), at p.

3. Therefore, despite our position advanced above, Licensee below provides substantive responses to TMIA's Interrogatories

_ ~

'l and 2 to the extent that Licensee is able to do so with reasonable effort. These responses demonstrate that the June 27 incident.was unrelated to any alleged " deferred maintenance", and therefore unrelated to TMIA's Contention 5.

Licensee does not here respond to TMIA's Interrogatories 3 and 4. At page 2 of "TMIA's Motion To Compel Discovery of Licensee," dated July 26, 1980, counsel for TMIA stated that

" Interrogatories 3 and 4 are relevant in that they were sub-mi?ted in order to obtain admissible evidence in connection with Contention 7." However, five days earlier - on July 21, 1980 - counsel for TMIA declined to answer Staf f interroga-tories on TMIA's _ Contention 7 on the grounds that TMIA is withdrawing its Contention 7. See, "TMIA's Response To NRC Staff's Interrogatories Based On The SER" (July 21, 1980), at

p. 8. As the Board has previously explained, there is no need to secure Board permission to withdraw a contention. See, e.g., "First Special Prehearing Conference Order" (December 18, 1979), at p. 50; " Memorandum and Order On Prehearing Conference Of May 13, 1980" (May 22, 1980), at p. 11. If TMIA withdraws a contention on the record, the contention is withdrawn. A party is not required to respond to interrogatories on a contention which has'been withdrawn. Therefore, Licensee is not obligated to respond'to.TMIA's-Interrogatories 3 and 4 on its Contention 7.

p

4 Interrogatorv 1 Provide a complete narration of the events leading up to the' June 27, 1980 accident.

A. hhat components were involved?

B. Was this accident connected to any maintenance activity being performed at the time?

1. If so, what maintenance was being performed?

a. Give the names of all those responsible for the maintenance work and supervision.

Resconse At the time of the June 27, 1980 spill, Three Mile Island Unit I had been shutdown since February 1979. The core decay heat was being removed by the "A" Decay Heat Removal System.

i The Reactor Coolant System (RCS) level was being maintained in accordance with Special Operating Procedure (SOP) 1-80-29A.

SOP-1-80-29A was instituted on June 2, 1980 in order to control RCS level-sufficiently low to permit installation of a required restart modification and to perform planned maintenance on the Make-up and Purification System (MU & PS) and on the Once Through Steam Generator (OTSG). The "B" OTSG upper and lower manways and lower ple sum hand hole were open and final prepara-tions were being mudt to repair one tube in the "B" OTSG. The tube repair was scheduled to be worked late in the morning of June 27, 1980.

At. the time of the spill incident, the Operations Departmen .was performing a routine transfer.of the "A" Vital Bus from; its normal power supply, the "A" Inverter, to an.

alternate power supply, the "E" Inverter. As part of this routine power supply transfer, the "A" Vital Bus is de-energized -and then re-energized from the new power supply.

Af ter the "A" Vital Bus is re-energized, the operator is.

required to manually re-energize components being fed from the bus. In this case, the bus had been de-energized and re-energized, and the operator was in the process of re-energizing components being fed from the bus. While manually re-energizing components, an operator' error occurred that resulted in an inadvertent actuation of the "A" Engineered Safeguards Actuation System (ESAS).

Actuation of the "A" ESAS provided the isolation valve (LH-V-5A) between the Borated Water Storage Tank (SWST) and the RCS with an ESAS signal to open. The valve opened as designed upon the signal. The operator responded to limit the time the isolation valve was open to 2 minutes and 9 seconds. During this time period, the water contained in the BWST filled the RCS,fmainly by gravity flow, to the level at whi7h the watei was able to spill out of the open hand hole in the lower plenum of the "B" OTSG .

A. DH-V-5A was the only component directly involved in this incident. It operated as designed.

B.- This incident was caused by inadvertent operator error during a routine transfer of power supplies to an electrical bus. It was not directly connected to any maintenance activity being performed at the time.

Interrogatory 2 Are the components involved in (the] accident repaired?

oA. Were there, on June 27, 1980, any outstanding work requests referring to components involved in the accident?

1. If so, provide copies of each work request.

2. Provide an explanation of why the components were not repaired.

B. Provide complete maintenance records of all maintenance performed in the last five years on the components involved in the accident.

Response

DH-V-5A responded to the inadvertent ESAS Actuation as designed. This incident was not due to the failure or defect of any component. Therefore, no work requests or maintenance records are relevant to the incident. Licensee's production of such records would be particularly burdensome in light of their demonstrated irrelevance.

Respectfully submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE By: M deme, h. /Aht.

~

K Ernest L. Blake,9Jr.

Dated: August 5,-1980

- ,/::tjy;

/ .

s. .s ,.m;J N;_ .. a

's v y ,. s

. -.;t 5D v

v

'. . ja UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t : M 7 E0 > g h

, k Cl h d - D BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,

+,,...[.

J:A.,.:d 32(,',3 k

.n- .;n::,

'e /

,' ~a: i y i as v

It the Matter of )

)

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) (Restart)

(Three Mile Island Nuclear )

Station, Unit'No.:1)' .)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Licensee's Response To TMIA Motion To Compel Response of Licensee To TMIA's ' Follow-Up' Interrogatories Based On The June 27, 10,000 Gallon Leak" were served upon those persons on the attached Service List by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, this 5th day of August, 1980.

Delissa IA. Ridgw'ay ()

Dated: August 5, 1980

l

_ _ n. .

L, v.

'+

i-r I

i I

i'

• m -mam i "L "u A . e- .n., 3AM.TC -- n wT. .I.V.? ?.1" wF n*

• 4'"L MTT** ^M i-  % w o.*. .Q Pue "v? A *.U r.V. C O.V.M.v .' .C .C s*' V..^U l

m 2 7."f COr. - . M. . .T.

• ^

s\*. L .V. a q*Tr o na  ?. V.

M.". v3 i..T C " v.ew q T ".. C C C

- M .C.R"

. .,. .x.e

.. .v....e

.. o.a )

)

.ve.

- . . o.Ce. sn t.. m.. .4.v .e.Di sCe a Cc.u.eAev.

s . u ) Doc.ke*w ". . o . on s  ?. .' c.

) (3..s e

s*.)

( . w. e. s. o.. . ..

. ..e.a..d. v... ,c ,e _._. )

.e a._4. . o. , L+.4. .

e sc. .)

)

gmng/

w L .". awl yy.m

.w p e uADa

.r .. .a .n . e. .n. d .~. ". , 7 a- nu d--a. a'c s". . . n' . *=".d.., -=~u- 4- =

n -

Chairman Assistant Counsel Atcmic Safety and Licensing Pennsylvania Public Utility Cc=='"

Scard Panel Pos: Office Sox 3265 U.~S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Washincten, D.C. 20555

.: e- .1 - +.a. . , r.~,.-a

. r.1.

-an --

Dr. Walter H. Jordan Assistant Attorney General Atcmic Safety and Licensing

~ 505 Executive House Board Panel Post Office Ecx 2357 r 381 West Outer Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 L Oak Ridge, "ennessee 37930 J cnn .=. . .u..t .... _a n. _ u.

Dr. Linda W. Little Chairman, Dauphin County Scard

-Atcmic Safety and Licensing cf Ccamissicners s Soard Panel- Dauchin County Courthcuse

( .5000 Hermitage-Drive Front and Mar.ket Streets Raleigh,l North Carolina 27612 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 I

I

, James-R.~Courtellette, Esquire (4) Walter W. Cchen, Esquire~

t

. 0ffice of the-Executive Legal Director Censumer Advocate

-C. S. Nuclear Rec.ulaterv. Cc= mission Office of' Consumer Advccate L

.Washincton, L D.C.,- 20555 14:h Flecr, Strawberre. Sc.uare

u. a ..o

. . 4 - w t. . , , 3. . , . a- . 3...

. . . . .....43 3 7 , .3 7

-Dccketing'and Service'Section (3) a w e o. ..u.e._c e.. , e a ..

e_s.s.a w .  ;

U. (S . Nuclearf Regulatory Certriission Washington,:D.C. 20555~

&l*

L _ m

4

.Ta r # a.n v. * . C " ... 4..* .g. ".a" , * =~ q" i-. a. _ W i .' .' .i a ".. .c . v'c .- d .= .". ,

. 7-A, T. s c,", 4 .- =.

-- n. ... . r .e"

1. . . .- ". . a.w' . e . .-"; "cw s b...i c.

. n'.*c .a.v . .

."w.- - D a n. " .' e .i.c, = _4 ... = ~. N" c _' a. .r

m. ..u.. A . S . ... e. . _4 .,.g C c.... 1 ... . e e r.,...~,,

- --y.

-2'O^'Mcrth.Second Street Harmen & Weiss

:. .crisburg , ' Pennsylvania 17110 1725 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 506 Washingten, D.C. 20006

~heodore A. Adler, Esquire WidoffLReager Selkcwitz &:Adler- Rcbert Q. Pollard Pest Office Ecx 1547 609 Mentpelier Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 Salti=cre, Maryland 21213 Ellv.n R.. Weiss, Esquire; Chauncey Kepford A' s... n. ... a.,. ...u. a. (.s ..4 .e. ,. c.e pw.,Ca.. ed w n~

2,. -

.w. .. . . . C .4 . %..

. .u. . v e h.m. .e..w... A

.J..s sC_4e ....a. .T..,/.4..r... . . ..e

. 1

.... C C u2 _7 _4 . 4..C.. . r. . vL, le a.-.

.e

-Harmen & Weiss Pcwer

' 7 2.: Tva. .e.-==..,

. . . N.., S u .d . a. 50#. , .' .' C . .' = ..ed - . .". e.. "- e N. a s .' .i ..e. .. .. ' . w^ .

. '000o'

. S*-=~a F w- l .' a. - a. , =.=.....=";'"<=..4=

. . . ..'0.'

Steven C. Shelly Marvin . Lewis y .

3.. A .4 .4 a.s. .,

7 * *

. . w. w.b. ..m m. a. .c w. a . c. . . m .. ..

.y. a. c.a.g .a..d e. s = g y.* , o.c..=..=.- nj .17.s..=. 4 a' 17 0.:,5 - t.h.i.'.=da..'.y..4.=.,

k ==.."....=,"y.'"v.=....'..=.

m' .' o. .' 4 C, Ga.e.3 _.a-.v.e_

ee-. .u.a 2 , . 4;...e y. . ..a...c c ..

Holly S. Kech R. D. 5

-Legislatic.- Chairman Ccatesville, Pennsylvania 19320 n- ..._4 _ v,.,

. u. .3.. . . . c. ., t,. ,, c.ey es.e ....:

.. . 4 - yc . < .

245 West '.>hiladelo'.2a Street '

York, Pennsvivania- 17404 .

l J

1 o