ML20133G623
| ML20133G623 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1985 |
| From: | Dixon O SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| To: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8508090008 | |
| Download: ML20133G623 (1) | |
Text
f-5....J-SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY POST OFFICE 764 cotuustA. south CAnotiNA 29218 f
'a ]
o...ol.oN.
- ryp, viCr PaesiOENT A
,f NuCLEam OPERATIONS -
May 30, 1985
,Y/
Dr.
J.
Nelson Grace Regional Administrator U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II, Suite 2900 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30323
SUBJECT:
Virgil C.
Summer Nuclear Station Docket No.
50/395 Operating License No.
NPF-12 Response to Notice of Violation NRC Inspection Deport 85-13
Dear Dr. Grace:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company is in agreement with the alleged violations addressed in the Enclosure to NRC Inspection Report 50-395/85-13.
Per discussion with NRC Region II Staff, please find attached copies of LER's85-006 and 85-007, which were previously submitted, as the response to the noted violations.
If there are any questions, please call us at your convenience.
Very truly
- ours,
'f4) 0.
W.
ixon, Jr.
CJM/0WD/csw Attachment cc:
V.
C.
Summe r C.
L.
Ligon (NSRC)
T.
C.
Nichols, Jr./0.
W.
Dixon, Jr.
K.
E.
Nodland i
E.
H.
Crews, Jr.
R.
A.
Stough E.
C.
Roberts G.
Percival W.
A.
Williams, Jr.
C.
W.
Hehl D.
A.
Nauman J.
B.
Knotts, Jr.
I & E (Washington)
Group Managers NPCF O.
S.
Bradham File C.
A.
Price S.
R.
Hunt i
f l
geol
^==
- =
em 1
l i
seeCTere me u S. asuCLEA 4 IL81uLAf 0mv Comasensom AP'#CYED Owe suo 31to-4H04
'*'8M'*
LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
DOCKET *euestem 123 FAGE+3B P ACILITY 8easse til Virgil C.
Summer Nuclear Station o 15 l 0 j o j o O I 91 5 1l0Fl012 Tifit les Lapse of Operator License Evtsef oaf t les Lan asuasse4 aga Repon? 04f 9171 QTMin F ACILITIES INv0Lvt0 (Si wCNT=
Caf VEam
'EAm "NN'n" 7D UCNfm 04, vtam
- Ac:L.tv % Auss Cocutt aevustaini 015101 0 13 1 1 I 0 l3 2l0 85 8 l5 0j0l6 0l0 0l4 1l 9 8l 5 o,sio t o i o,
, i TM*S atrom? IS SuSestTTED PunSua8ef TO TME mEQuintestauft OP 10 CPR $ (Chere eae er -ere es,pe done
,s atti
"'088'88 28 483165 20 eetles 80 734e6:2Het 73 71ttt m
20 48SieHiled 00 3 Sleet 11 98.73teH2Het 73 71 ret
=
=
oTMin,se. Ten, 1101 1 I0 10 m eeSwHiimi
.0 maim
.0 7:wH2n.e.
+.A.,,,,,
Deen e.e <
NaC core
[
00 73te6(2Het 80 7344H2He=Hal J8dA8 20.4WieH1H=)
20 400teittH6el 80 73deH2 Hist OS 73a4H2H.isHel 29 deSisHillel 90 734eit2Hisil 90 731sil2Hal LICE 8sS48 CONF ACT Pom Twig LER litt NAiE E TELEPwCNE Nwwgim AmE A COct 3,4,S
,5,2,0,9 A.
R.
Koon, Jr., Assoc. Mgr., Regulatory Compliance 8,0,3 i
CoasPLif t 08e8 LING PCm E ACM C0 esp 08eENT Palkunt DESCase40 las TMis espont its:
mf wa AC-
- )P,AC qpa fs
CAwSE 575784 COMPCNENT m t, arAeLE CAust sysitu couPONENT p gg I
f I l l 1 I f
I l !
! I f I
l 1 1 l l l l
1 ! I I I l SUPPLEMENTAL REPCat EXPECT 801144 VONT=
Cav viam SLewissiCN vt$ I!9 wee temere,e IJrPtC'tQ Sv0er$310nr CA TEl
%Q l
l l
A TxACT m-,,,e,.oo,e-.
. e ees,e..
e,e.
~ e. e.e-o -,,e.
,..e., n.,
During the performance of a review of operator license status, Nuclear Training personnel discovered that an operator's license had expired on February 3, 1985, and a renewal application had not been submitted.
This discovery occurred on March 20, 1985 at approximately 1100 hours0.0127 days <br />0.306 hours <br />0.00182 weeks <br />4.1855e-4 months <br /> and involved SRO License No. SOP-20001.
The operator was immediately removed from licensed operator duties and was not reinstated until the NRC issued a new license.
The cause of this event was determined to be personnel error in that the persons responsible for submitting license renewal applications did not verify that the application was submitted to or received by the NRC.
There were no adverse consequences for this event.
The operator was fully qualified by training and experience to perform Control Room Supervisor duties.
Also, another SRO licensed operator, in addition to the Shift Supervisor, was present in the control room for all but two (2) of the twenty-nine (29) shifts in question.
The Licensee has taken corrective action to provide better administrative control concerning the preparation and submittal of license renewal applications.
qf L ~~ ' _
w- -
r
., i U S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AMROVED 0v8 NO H50-0104 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION ARC Form 354A ExF RES 8/3185 pagg (3)
DOCKET NUMSER (2) g,g gygggg 4gg FACILITY NAME 11)
SEOjy h s as vtan g
0' 0l2 Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station 0l5l0l010l319l5 815 01Ol6 010 0l2 m n,,.
u.. w. - unc w w,nm r
Nuclear During the performance of a review of operator license status, Training personnel discovered that an operator's license had expired on This February 3,1985, and a renewal application had not been submitted.
1985 at approximately 1100 hours0.0127 days <br />0.306 hours <br />0.00182 weeks <br />4.1855e-4 months <br /> and discovery occurred on March 20, involved SRO License No. SOP-20001.
The operator was immediately removed from licensed operator duties and was not reinstated until the NRC issued a new license.
The cause of this event was determined to be personnel error in that the persons responsible for submitting license renewal applications did notThe verify that the application was submitted to or received by the NRC.
operator performed Control Room Supervisor duties for twenty-nine (29) chifts from the time of expiration of his license until he was removed from licensed operator duties.
Therefore, the Licensee did not meet the in that the Control Room requirements of Technical Specification 6.2.2.a Supervisor did not hold a valid SRO license on Unit 1.
There were no adverse consequences for this event.
The operator was fully qualified by training and experience to perform Control Room Also, another SRO licensed operator, in addition to Supervisor duties.
the Shift Supervisor, was present in the control room for all but two (2) of the twenty-nine (29) shifts in question.
The Licensee has taken corrective action to provide better administrative control concerning the preparation and submittal of license renewal applications.
These controls include clear assignment of responsibility, a more formal system of tracking, followup and verification of all steps during application processing, and followup with the Licensee's Regulatory Compliance Group to verify that the NRC has issued the license renewal.
This system should prevent recurrence of an operator's license being allowed to lapse.
r N
U S. fouCLE244 kEGULATAv CC 1_
NaC Form 388 APPmO sE3 Case suo 3tgo-.010e M3 '
*"'s si3im LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
Pagg (33 DOCERT Nueseta 13 o is I o 10 l o 131915 i lor l 0 3 1
8ACJLITV Naast til Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station
"blesel aenerator seismicity OTHER F ACILITIES INv0LVED 10)
AIPORT DATi 17)
EvtNT DATEtSi Ltm asynssER ten F ACsury asavel DOCKETNuwstmisi 88(WQ[,As a,s v,s uCNTM OAv VEAR WONT w OAv vtam vtAR o15101010 1 i !
0 13 2l1 85 815 0l 0l 7 0 l0 0 l41l9 815 o isto io ioi i i THIS REPont is SutedlTTED PURSUANT TO TME mEOulAEMENTS OF 10 CFR l IC*sca cae er more of,ae o"e=>afi(tti r
73 7itti OPERATM 80 736eH2Het MOOE
- 1 20 402tti 20 408tal n.m.,
1
.0 ni.H2H.i 0...H H.>
0 =i.Hu OT=,.. g m,3 n2n.,
1i0,0
. 0.
nt n.,
.0 =I.H2,
,,0, 30 731aH2HeimH Al J66AJ 20 400ieH191 est 50 73teH211el to 731eH2Hvenitet 60 72deH2H.)
20 408teH1 Hews 20 actientlivl 80 73teH2Ptm) 30 73:est2 Hat LICENSEE CONTACT POR TMis LEm 4125 TELEPwCNE Nywgga NAvf AmE A COOE A.
R.
Koon.
Jr.. Assoc. Mer.. Regulatory Compliance 81 0i 3 31 41 Si H 51 21 Q S COMPLETE ONE LINE FOm E ACM COnePONENT F AILumE DESCRISED 6N TMeg mEPORT H3)
AC n
CAwSE Svnftv COvPONENT
,,O "fo g,*aos' 0"
CAVSE SY STE U CoupONENT g
O Pa N
A E,K f
I I I I I I I
I ! I I I I UONT=
Dav YEAR SUPPLEMENTAL mEPOmf EXPECTED 11 A6 Swevil5 TON
%O l
l l
v E5 He,en como e e E MPEC'E0 Ev0M'SSION CATE*
r A.., a A C T e.,,.,,x
.......-., u,
,,,,,,, n.,
the NRC Resident On March 21, 1985, at approximately 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br />, j Inspector identified scaffolding over the generator units for Diesel The scaffolding had been installed on March Generators "A" and "B".
on the 1985, for the purpose of preventive maintenance (PM) l 20 and 21, l
overhead cranes and could have had an adverse impact on the operability of both onsite AC power sources for a period of (scaffolding was removed by 1555 I
approximately 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutesThe potential inoperability is based on the hours on March 21, 1985).
scaffold falling during a postulated loss of preferred power l
concurrent with a seismic event.
The cause of the scaffold installation error is attributed to The mechanical maintenance planner failed to personnel error.
consider the potential adverse impact on diesel generator operability when he scheduled the PM.
The Licensee has initiated the following corrective actions to prevent a recurrence:
All personnel involved in erection / evaluation of scaffolding have 1.
been directed to carefully review each proposed installation.
1985.
Maintenance personnel will review the event by May 1, 2.
Procedural controls will be reviewed and revised as necessary by 3
July 1, 1985
%">'u~ "'
Mc t$9u; 3 5=~
r-U $ NUCLEAll KEGULATORY COMMIS$ ION CAC Forme A4A LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION 4. cao ove No siso-o,c4 Expinf 5 8/3185 DOCKET NUMBER 121 LER NUMSER tat paGE ist FACILif Y NAME Ill
" M.
"'I'J:
"aa Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station o l5 l 0 l 0 l 0 l 3 l 9 l 5 8 l 5 0 l 0 l 7 0 l 0 0 l 2 OF 0 l 3 TEXT II, nwe wece os reevned, use edeoanet MC form JaWslith 1985, at approximately 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br />, the NRC Resident On March 21, Inspector notified the Licensee of a plant condition which potentially could have degraded the functional capability, as required by Technical and " B".
Specifically, Specification 3.8.1.1, of Diesel Generators " A" the inspector had observed scaffolding installed over both of the generator units for preventive maintenance (PM) on the overhead cranes.
The scaf folding had been installed over Diesel Generator " A" during the hours of 0945 and 1115 on March 20, 1985 and over Diesel Generator "B" during the hours of 0730 and 0930 on March 21, 1985.
The scaf folding could have had an adverse impact on the operability of both onsite AC power sources for a period of approximately 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutes during a postulated loss of preferred power concurrent with a seismic event.
Mnintenance engineering personnel inspected the area immediately after being notified of the situation.
The initial analysis of the scaffold installation assumed that the scaf fold would f all and degrade the functional capability of the diesel generators since there is insuf ficient technical information to allow an objective evaluation of the scaf fold's ability to withstand a seismic event.
All scaffold material was subsequently removed f rom the area by 1555 hours0.018 days <br />0.432 hours <br />0.00257 weeks <br />5.916775e-4 months <br /> on March 21, 1985.
The cause of the event is attributed to personnel error.
The mechanical maintenance planner failed to consider the potentially adverse impact on diesel generator operability during a seismic event when he scheduled the PM on both overhead cranes at the same time.
Contributing factors to the scaf fold installation error were:
There was an inadequate description of the proposed scaf folding on 1.
the General Maintenance Procedure (GMP) 101.008, " Seismic and Vital Equipment Area Scaf folding / Shielding Evaluation and Utilization,"
evaluation form initiated by the planner on March 8, 1985.
the proposed installation reviewed by maintenance Therefore, engineering on March 13 was not considered adverse to the operability An additional error occurred when the of the diesel generators.
engineer was not informed of later changes to the scope of the scaffolding.
The engineer did not personally go to the site of the scaf fold 2.
erection to ensure work was within the scope of his initial evalua tion.
Construction personnel erected a scaffold that clearly exceeded the 3.
description on the request form.
s c.o.
u.*
u s NUCLEAR KicutAToav coMMimom NPc peren >As LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION anaovfo ove No siso_om E xp+mES 8/3185 OOcKET NUMGER 128 LER NUMGER 161 PAGE 131 F ACILITY NAME til
t MJ 'n
"'VJ:
"^=
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station 015lo10l0l319l5 815 Ol 017 010 0 l 3 0' 0h iEx11I9 more space e requered, use edenannt NMC Fann 386A'es (th The Licensee has initiated the following corrective actions to prevent a recurrence:
1.
Short term corrective action was initiated by the Manager, Maintenance Services immediately after the event of March 21, 1985.
All personnel involved in erection or evaluation of scaffolding have been directed to visit the site prior to installation to insure an adequate preliminary evaluation of the scaf folding required has been conducted and its potential impact on equipment in the area has been eva luated.
Scaf folds which could adversely impact equipment operability will be coordinated with activities that require the
. equipment to be removed from service.
2.
The details and consequences of this event will be reviewed with maintenance personnel by May 1, 1985.
3.
GMP 101.008 will be reviewed and revised as necessary to clarify and re-enforce the requirements for scaf folding erection.
This action will be complete by July 1, 1985.
l l
i l
l I
yac sonw Jesa
/
g