ML20155A956
| ML20155A956 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 09/19/1988 |
| From: | Jenison K, Little W, Poertner K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155A935 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-259-88-22, 50-260-88-22, 50-296-88-22, NUDOCS 8810060129 | |
| Download: ML20155A956 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000259/1988022
Text
o
.
[p $%g
'
t
.
'#
UNITED STATES
4
E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
!,.
- f
- e
o
!
REGION 11
E
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W.
-
j
,,,,,
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30323
Report Nos.:
50-259/85-2.?, 50-260/S3-22, ard 50-296/82-22
Licensee:
Tennessen Valley Authority
6N 3bA Lookout Place
1101 Market Street
Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801
DccLet tocs..
50-259, 50-260 ard 50-29C
License Ncs..
- 'PR-33, CPR-52,
and DPR-65
Facility han.c.
Broons Ferry 1, 2, and 3
Inspecticn Cenducted: July 11-15, 1933
i / 7 ff'
Inspectors:[Jens
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
C te Signed
N-
'I
K
. S'ntor Resident Insrector
- - b
&
Y ? k - _.
J
K.Poert
.r. Resicent inspktor
ate Signed
-b
- 'f0/b
Cd
g(T)-
_[//[k
Approved by:
.
5. u
secticn Cnief
Date 5 gnea
,
TVA Projects Section 2
TVA Projects Division
SUWMRY
Scope:
This 3pecial unannounced inspection was conducted to assess the New
Employee Concerns Progran.
Results:
One violation was identified invclving inadeauate encrective action
in the area cf cperator qualifications. and is a refuel item,
50-259,250.296/55-22-01:
Inadequcte Correctise Action
In addition, the Bronn's Ferry New Employee Concerns Progran appears
to De acequatel ' irpiementeu ano ac:11ni sterea, aria is acceptacle to
support the restart of Srcnns Ferry Unit 2.
8810060129 880919
ADOCK 05000259
0
FDC
.
_
.
.
'
,
'
.
.
-
,
I
i
REPORT DETAILS
t
1.
Persons Contacted
7
,
,i
Licensee Employees
,
- J. Walker, Plant Manager
i
"C. E11euge Employee Concerns Program
!
- J. Looney, Employee Concerns Program
- P. Heck, Employee Concerns Task Group
"D. Hosmer, Restart Test Program
i
- N. McFall, Compliance Staff
'
"R. Earon, Quality Assurance Supervisor
?
'
4
NRC Personnel
,
"
"D. Carpenter, Senior Resident Inspector
!
- C. Brooks, Resident Inspector
'
- E.
Christnot, Resident' Inspector
- W. Bearden, Resident Inspector
I
- Attended exit interview on July 15. 1938.
l
2.
Employee Concerns Program
a.
Program Review
The inspectors reviewed the New Employee Concerns Program (ECP) and
[
the Employee Concerns Task Group (ECTG) Program (old program). The
j
new ECP is a commitment in the TVA Corporate Nuclear Performance
j
i
l
Plan (CNPP) and is described in the TVA Employee Concern Program
,
Instructions Manual.
This ECP manual
is
supported by six
j
instructions which Pere reviewed by the inspectors and are listed
i
,
l
below:
ECP 1,
site Representative Procedure
ECP 2,
Reserved
i
i
ECP 3,
File Storage
ECP 4,
Identification of Employee Concerns '.ht.t are potential
restart itens at Sequoyah
j
ECP 5,
Corrective Action Verification (ECTG)
l
ECP 6
Identification of Employee Concerns that are potential
j
restart items at Browns Ferry.
'
ECP 7,
(Oraft) ECr Corrective A; tion
The inspectors verified that the ECP concerns were reviewed for
restart /ren-restart cete-ination
for Brenns Fe r ry Unit 2 in
f
accordance witn tne criteria outlinec in t h CtF
,
i
4
I
$
i
!
i
I
-
.
.
.
a
2
.-
,
i-
L
The inspectors identified two programmatic issues which did not
l
appear to be at the same state of completion that was required to
support the restart of Seaucyah Unit 2.
These issues were the piece
parts progran (espacially the operability lookback determinaticn) and
vendor nanual/ drawing control program.
Based on the review of the New Employee Concerns Program manual and
its supporting procedures, the inspectors considered the New Employee
Concerns Program to be adequately established at Brewns Ferry.
<
b.
Implementation
The inspectors conducted an implementation evaluation and reviewed
the following ECP concerns and files:
'
1
ECP-87-BF-F09
ECP-S7-BF-112
ECP-S7-BF-K46
ECP-87-BF-062
ECP-87-BF-369
ECP-SS-BF-274
1
ECP-SS-BF-801
ECP-SS-BF-495
ECP-SS-BF-200
'
ECP-SS-BF-568
ECP-S6-BF-541
ECP-87-BF-094
ECP-87-BF-H30
ECP-S7-BF-593
ECP-S6-BF-564
ECP-86-BF-239
ECP-86-BF-214
ECP-86-BF-C67
1
ECP-86-BF-214
ECP-S6-BF-157
ECP-86-BF-BS3
}
j
One instance was identified where a file did not adequately address
the employee's concern as stated.
in discussions with the ECP
4
Manager, it was agreed that the file would be reopened to better
address closure of the concern.
The inspectors concluded that the ECP appears to be adecuately
'
staffed, managed, and implemented, and can support the restart of
<
Unit 2.
j
c.
Review of ECP Subcategory Reports
I
)
Tne inspectors reviewed portions of the following ECTG Subcategory
i
Reports:
)
(1) 31000, Operations / operational.
Element 31003 included Correc-
tive Action Tracking Docu ent (CATD) item OD 31003-BFN-01. As a
j
corrective action to the CATD, standard pract ce BF 14.25,
i
Clearance Procedure, was revised to require that tygon tubing
'
J
utilited for temporary levei inoication ce centrolled by a
,
caution order due to the potential for nerpressuri:ation which
l
would result in tubing rupture.
The inspector determined that
this item had been closed on the licensee's tracking document
,
I
and by the ECP reviewer. Review of CF 14.25 determined that the
l
revision to the procedure cid not satisfy the requirements of
the C ATD.
Tne pro:edure was revised te alert nsirtenance to
use cautien wner utilizia; t3;on tub a; f or ter:3ra ry l e ', e l
i
indication.
The C/TD problem aescription stated the reason for
[ '. ~
- -----
- - -------
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ' - - ~
-
'
.
'
-
.
3
the CATD was a lack of administrative controls on root valves
to tygon tubing being used for levJ1 control.
This item was
referred to the licensee for review.
(2) 30100, Mechanical Equipment R(liability. No deficiencies were
identified.
(3) 30200, Electrical and Communications.
No deficiencies were
identified.
(4)
30700, Nuclear Power Site Program.
No deficiencies were
identified.
This program.will require additional inspection to cetermine adequate
implementation of CATO items. In addition, inspection of the review
packages that generated the CATO items will be necessary in order to
'
determine if CATO closure adequately addressed the employee concern
and programmatic concerns.
The inspectors were unable to determine
if this program is adequate to support the startup of Browns Ferry
Unit 2.
Further inspection of the ECTG Program as it applies to
Browns Ferry will be conducted prior to Unit 2 startup.
3.
Operator Qualifications
During this inspection, the inspectors became aware of an issue irvolving
the training status of several Shif t Engineers (four temporarily premoted
and four permanently promoted).
Four Assistant Shift Engineers weru
promoted to the position of Shif t Engineer in order to support site
manning requirements.
Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual (NQAM), part II, Section 6.1, requires
that shift engineers satisfy the minimun qualifications delineated in
Nuclear Plant Operator Training program procedure FMP 0202.05 at the time
of initial core loading or appointment to the active position.
FMP
0202.05 requires candidates for the position of Snift Engineer to pass the
Shift Engineer accrediting <.xamination unless it is waived by the Chief,
Operator Training Branch, and the Plant Training Review Board or the
Accrediting Subcommittee.
Final Safety Analysis Reoort (FS AR), section
13.2.1.2.5, states that the shift engineers are qualified for their
supervisory positions by fulfilling the requirements of TVA's formal
operator training program.
This is a comprehensive work-study training
ano acvancement program witn rigorous qualifying examinations acministered
by a central accrediting comittee.
In approxi ately January 1937, the licensee's lire manage ent became aware
tnat the four temporarily prcmoted Shift Engineers did not reet the above
stancards and did not take adeauate corrective actions to resolve the
issue.
Ir additien, it was icentifiec trat fcur etner permaner.tly
assigred Snift Engineers cid not rave recercs to snow trat their certifi-
cation examinations were successfully passed. The licensee nad not taken
adequate correctise actior at the time of this irstecticr.; therefore, this
is icentifiec as a viciation cf 10 CrR 50, arreno1x E. Criterior XVI.
Corrective Action (259,260,296/SS-22-01).
s-
_ _ _ _ .-
-
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
,
I.
,
.
,
t
.
1
4
'
I
4.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
i
(Closed) Unre:olved Ite- 259,260,295!!7-3-03, t.a:L of Fornalt:ed Methods
To Fully Implement ECP Program.
This item addressed varicus observatiens vot* res:ect to the implementa-
tien of the estaDIisned hew Erployee Concerns irojra ..
Tne inspectors
reviewed this iten and determined that the cbservations, as stated in the
i
subject inspection report, were accurate and still evisted.
In addition,
'
the inspectors identified the following observations:
No generic reviews are condu:ted on ECP files.
}
-
,i
No reviews of the old program for ccm on issues are docutented during
-
the ECP file and c;ncern closure prccess.
The ECP data base is incomplete for files.
The data base for
-
concerns is complete and adequate.
The ECP verification of corrective actions has not been formally
-
established in the ECP Program. Currently line management is solely
i
responsible for completion of corrective action.
The New Employee
Concerns procedure, Verification of Corrective Action, is still in
draft form.
The above observations, in cl u:ii ng the ones made in In mection Report
259,260,296/87-30, do not constitute regulatory issues or specific
[
commitments by the licensee.
None of the abovt observattens resulted in
i
regulatory or compliance issues.
These observations did not
e- '.ribute
!
to any safety issess and were identified by the inspe: tors
..y for
completeness.
This iten is closed.
l
5.
Exit Interview (30703)
The inspection scoce and findings were su- art:ed on July 15, 1953, with
those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspectors described the
areas inspected and discussed in cetail the inspection results listed
b e l o,< .
The licensee did not identify as preprietary u y of the materials
provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection. The New
Erployee Concerns Program files anc cer: erns are aaministratively
conficential and were treated as such by tne insoectors.
(0 pen) Violation 259,260,296/25-22-01,
Iradequate Corrective A:tien,
paragraph 3.
(Closed) Unresobed Iten 259,200,296/S7-30-03, La:L of Formalind Metheds
To Fully Implement ECP Program, paragraph 4.