ML20053E019

Notice of Violation from Insp on 820226-0325

ML20053E019
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	04/15/1982
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20053D990	List: IR 05000259/1982012 ML20053D989 ML20053D997 ML20053E010 ML20053E019 ML20053E031
References
50-259-82-12, 50-260-82-12, 50-280-82-12, 50-296-82-12, NUDOCS 8206070533
Download: ML20053E019 (2)

Text

APDENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Tennessee Valley Authority Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, 50-296 Browns Ferry 1, 2 and 3 License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, DPR-68 As a result of the inspection conducted on February 26 - March 25,1982, and in accordance with the Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR 66754 (October 7,1980),

the following violations were identified.

A.

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criteria V as committed to in TVA Topical Report (TR75-1), paragraph 17.2.5 requires that activities affecting quality be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures or drawings.

Contrary to the above, the requirement that activities affecting quality be prescribed by documented instructions or procedures of a type appropriate to the circumstances was not met in that on March 17, 1982 it was determined that the outer Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) exhaust rupture disc was not installed. The licensee could produce no documentation showing that the outer rupture disc had been worked on. The outer rupture disc was last known to have been installed in April,1980. The inner rupture disc was replaced in April 1980 and June 1981. The work instructions for both these work activities did not discuss how to replace the inner rupture disc or the type inspection to be made after completion of work.

This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement I.D.3) and is applicable to Unit 1.

B.

Technical Specification 4.6.H.1 requires that snubbers be inspected in accordance with previous snubber history operability; specifically if one snubber is found inoperable during an inspection, tne next snubber inspec-tion shall be scheduled for a 12 month interval.

Contrary to the above, the requirement to schedule a snubber inspection for a 12 month inspection interval when one snubber was previously found inoper-able was not met in that during the Unit 2, May 23,1979, accessible snubber inspection, one snubber was found to be inoperable.

The next snubber inspection was conducted October 17, 1980, during the Unit 2 outage approximately 17 months later.

This is a Severity Level V Violation (Supplement I.E.) and applies to Uni t 2.

8206070533 820526 PDR ADOCK 05000259 O

PDR

Tennessee Valley Authority 2

Docket Nos. 50-259, 260, 296 Notice of Violation License Nos. DPR-33, 52, 68 C.

Technical Specification 6.3. A. requires that detailed written procedures be prepared, approved and adhered to for radiation control and surveillance requirements.

Contrary to the above, the requirement that detailed written procedures be approved and adhered to was not met in that:

(1) On ihrch 17, 1982 the inspector determined that Operating Instruction (01)-77, Operation of Radwaste, being used by the radwaste operator, was not of the latest approved revision issued on February 9,1982.

(2) During a review of SI 4.6.H on March 18, 1982, it was noted that no inspection criteria guidelines were given to correct deficiencies found during snubber inspections.

This is a Severity Level V Violation (Supplement I.E).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, you are hereby required to submit to this office within thirty days of the date of this Notice, a written statement or explanation in reply, including:

(1) admission or denial of the alleged viola-tions; (2) the reasons for the violations if admitted; (3) the corrective steps which nave been taken and the results achieved;-(4) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations; and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved.

Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.

Under the authority of Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

Date:

i

' )

c

>