ML20040E838
| ML20040E838 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hartsville  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1982 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040E833 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202050424 | |
| Download: ML20040E838 (3) | |
Text
r o,
TENNESSEE VALLE,Y gTgFjtlTg 3
CHATTANOOGA. TEN E'SMtI374dl f,, r; ; I.4 400 Chestnut Street Tower II
~
22J/ti!g P 2. OQ January 6, 1982 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II - Suite 3100 101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
Enclosed is our response to R. C. Lewis' December 10, 1981 letter to H. G. Parris transmitting Inspection Report Nos. 50-518/81-20,
-519/81-20, -520/81-20, and -521/81-20 regarding activities at our Hartsville Nuclear Plant which appeared to have been in violation of NRC regulations. We have enclosed our response to Appendix A, Notice of Violation. If you have any questions, please call Jim Domer at FTS 858-2725.
To the best of my knowledge, I declare the statements contained herein are complete and true.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 1
]
L. M. Mills, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure 8202050424 820122 PDR ADOCK 05000518 An Equal Opportunity Employer G
~
ENCLOSURE RESPONSE TO NRC-0IE LETTER FROM R. C. LEWIS TO H. G. PARRIS DATED DECEMBER 10,_1981
(
Reference:
Report Nos. 50-518/81-20,' 50-519/81-20, 50-520/81-20,ang50-521/81-20)
This report re7 ponds to the Notice of Violation described in Appendix A of the OIS inspection report referenced above. This is the final report on the subject noncompliance.
Noncompliance Item-Severity Level V - Violation 518/81-20-01 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented procedures and instructions and shall be accomplished in accordance with these procedures and instructions. Specifi-cation N6C-875 and its referenced specification G-9 specifies that surfaces too smooth for proper bonding shall be scarified before placing additional fill.
Contrary to the above, on November 19, 1981, during backfill operations adjacent to the ERCW pipeline in the area of the A-1 spray pond, backfill was placed on top of a smooth surface without any prior scarifying. The backfill surface had a smoothed polished surface as a result of sealing the surface with tampers at the close of fill operations on the previous day.
This is a Sevecity Level V Violation (Supplement II.E).
Response
1.
Admission or Denial of the Alleged Violation TVA admits the violation occurred as stated.
2.
The Reasons for the Violation The earthfill placement inspector was aware of the scarification require-ment. The inspector was accustomed to scarifying as performed in general earthfill operations; however, he did not believe that scarification could be accomplished within the confines of the pipe trench that was being back-filled. Scarifying would have been resumed when the backfill reached the level of the surrounding fill.
3 Corrective Steps Taken and Results Achieved l
Inspection and construction personnel wera instructed to begin lightly l
scarifying between layers on all backfill regardless of circumstances.
1 t
a
-=-
~-
o In a December 18, 1981, telephone conversation with appropriate design personnel, it was determined that the material placed in the cited fill area could remain in place. This determination was based on the limited area / extent of the backfill in question and the high degree of compaction.
This decision was documented on Quality Control Investigation Report No.
30417.
4.
Corrective Steps Taken to Avoid Further Noncompliance On December 18, 1981, Field Change Request (FCR) No. 4358 was orally approved to clarify the requirements for scarification during backfill operations..The change provides a clarification that scarification between layers of earthfill placed using hand-held compaction equipment is required only within specified areas. The specified areas are within a distance of twenty feet beyond the top of the slope of the inside face of the ESW spray pond liner and twenty feet beyond the exterior face of structures within the liner. This information will be incorporated into project construction soecification N6C-875; but until revision or the specification, the FCR will document the interpretation.
All earthfill inspection personnel have been notified of the FCR interpretation by memorandum dated December 21, 1981.
5.
Date When Full Compliance Was Achieved Full compliance was achieved on December 21, 1981.
4 O
i 1
e p---.
v t---
~ - -.