ML20203K502
See also: IR 05000259/1973002
Text
_
_
..
.
l . ';'
. j.i Oes
,
_ ::.
'.t.c
.
-
. v@y wsi'.y dt/ f.7
V 3
2[*+$,
7
..
-
. , . -
. . -
2-
r .- ,
?
,.y,
!.
>
. . . . : : ' t 8 g ; , . (. * k, ,'.
,
..
. , .
"'
_.
,i..:. pn
~
- r-:%.g;;f.M..
- J.
--
. ~
-
w
, p.-
..-
,,
.
...
., . - 4
.
r.<
, .,
.. ...
14..g.
'e
,
'g,
. '
-
"#
-
h. ,7
.
cp
. .,a:-
,
.
, . ,
'. f ' 1 ,
~
..*
- l-
_
'.
7
-
,
,
3
,
.1
as samposatan ampest so. so-ase/75-2
1
M:
M M M ISy M ty
i
313 pesar *=41m =T
!
'
Onettanooga, Tennessee 37401
-
-
i
ressaity Eamea Basume Ftrzy 1
- 9
aseet so.:
50-250
b
Maumes No.:
CFFR-29
Categesy
51
-
- -
y;
tm matan
Decatur, Alabama
~r t
Type of License: 1898 aess, 54R (G-R)
t- ,
,
,
.
.
,.
T;pe ef Inspoetians Esutias,
_
.
- @
%N' .
Dates of Inspection: Jassuery 15-19, 1973
d-
j
1*
antes of Psevious Inspection: December 14 and 20-21,1972
,
-
4
.Q
i
Principal Inspector
W. 5. Little, Reactor Iaspector
awe
Facilities Test and Staat g aranch
~,
'
_ -y
.
M
nosessanying Inspectors:
R. C. Paaker, Beactor Iasspector
'
'
,
l
Facilities Test and Startg Braneh
.
g%
,
'
W. W. Peary, mediation SpeeLalist
BMiala9. cal and Environmental Protesties Bras s
4
,
'
,
-
A. F. Giboom, Radiatica Specialist
meds.I.,Lest and naviminental rue.sta
numme
'
. !
,
'-
9
8
Original Signed h
,
'I
MAR 1319F3 -
1'
,
,
w. s. u*
)
Paine 43ek' h
.
/
W. S. Littaa, maasteer Inspector
Bete
'
-
g 3 g q. * *p ,
Familities Test and Staut g Bramah
'
-
j
.
% .nl ;p 4
i
movisued By:
'd %
5l
"
j
.
c. m. murphy, metia , mine
ante
-
i
raatuties Test and Starte areneh
,
i
, c.
i
j
., y
8604300403 860317
8,, ' *m7 E. .. 5b'
5,
tiORROWgS-782
.. .y -
- 4'
,,
,
'
t,{
e
.
g. ,
[
r,
'
i
r
'
- - - - - '
mwe
-
+
.
I
J
5
.
..
j
'
)
..
.
.
30 Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
-2-
,
l
'64t"-
.yX
,
~.
..f.?Yd')
.-
,
,
I.
Elmhegement &ction
A.
Violations
i
None
1
B.
Safety Items
II.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enfoyt Itses
A.
Violations
1.
Failure to Report Design Deficiency (50-259/72-12)
P
Aaraiting TVA response to violation letter.
.'y' ..
- Y'h
,
2.
Inadequate Test Record (50-259/72-12)
' '
< ' -
Aaraiting TVA response to violatiot letter.
3.
Main Steam Isolation valves (Units 1, 2, 3)
(ABC letter
to TVA dated September 11, 1972, Enclosure Item 2)
TVA is amraiting instructions from the valve swlier before
grinding and blanrHng of weld preparation area can be
accomplished.
4.
Scope of QA Program '(ABC letter to TVA dated May 4,1972,
Enclosure Item 1)
General construction specifications for piping have been
segraded to provide ad.11tional QA documentation for
piping systems as stated in the FSAR. It remains to
.be serified that the tygrading of QA docusantation for
!
almetzical and mechanical systems and components has
,
been implemented.
{ Details I, paragraph 3)
.
r
5.
Separation of Safety channels (ABC letter to TVE dated
August 3, 1972)
.
TVA's letter descrifoing action td be taken as a result
of a December 14, 1972, meeting between TVA, G-E and
i
R0 has not been received.
._
_
.
.
.
. . . - .
- - . .
_ .I
-
..
'
.
I
ED Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
-3-
Aistits of Construction Activities (50-259/72-9, I.A.1)
l
M &mp.
7.
i
Welder Qualification (50-259/72-9, I. A.2)
h dM@ .
l
B.
Safety Items
None
i
III.
New Unresolved Itaas
I
i
73-2/1' Bent Valve Stams
i
.!
Valve stans on two 24-inch Walworth valves were
.
l
during operation.
(Details I, paragraph 5)
hg
~'$
..
'
73-2/2 Limitorque Valve Operator Gear Failure
~
- . .; 5
.r$.
_
Two Model No. SMB-5T operators have experienced gear
failures.
(Details I, paragraph 4)
73-2/3 Emergency Operating Instructions
Review and revision of emergency operating instructions.
(See Details II, paragraph 2)
'
73-2/4 operating System Status
Development of a procedure to provide objective evidence
of system's operating status.
(Details II, paragraph 3)
73-2/5 Debris Removal
Cleanup of wooden foreign material in the RPV and primary
c
system loops.
(Details II, paragraph 4)
.,
,
'
73-2/6 anspie Delivery Lines
- f y .
No evaluation had been made or planned of radioactive
sample losses in sample delivery lines whid are to be
used to transport samples froh ventilation eshausta.
Sharp bends and corrugated hoses were included in sample
delivery lines.
(Details III, paragraph 7)
.
.
. _ .
.
_ - _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ , .
_ . _ . . _ , _
. . -
cr
..
'
.
.
.
M) 5. No. 54>-259/73-2
-4-
d
noes in
and source Diameters
!
-
Meestive sources used for &stamining efficiencies
~~
l
of scalor cotuating systese were smaller in diameter
'
than the particulate fi2ters and smear samples to be
analysed by these systems. No evalsation of the effect
of this diameter difference on sample analysis results
had been mode.
(Details III, pam.d 8)
,
IV.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items
l
72-12/1 Limitorque Valw operator Failure, RDB Mo. 72-3,
j
December 4,1972
l
No change.
!
72-11/A use of Operating Instructions
.
I
<
.
Management's policy with regard to requiring
j
to plant operating instructions has been tentati
.
established.
(Details II, paw..wh 7)
"
.
72-11/B Periodic Review of Operating Instructions
Management's policy with regard to periodic review of
plant operating instructions has been tantatively
,
established.
(Details II, paragraph 8)
72-11/C verification of Stan&y Readin==s
Measures for documenting satisfactory completion of
steps required to establish standby readiness of safety
related systems have been established and were reviewed
by the inspector. The inspector has no further questions
and considers this item closed at this time.
Valve Wall Thickness (AEC letter to TVA dated June 30,
.
1972)
.
Mo dtange.
Fuel Design Otanges (50-259/72-8)
FSAR Amen &nent 45 has been submitted updating the fuel
design description. This item it resolw d.
Startup Test Program (50-259/72-3)
No dep.
,
,
f
l
!
,
'
E-
__
_
_ . -
_ . - . .
- - ,
..
_ _ . , . . . . _ - . _ _ _ . , _ _ . , _ . . , _ _ . , - . _ - . - . . - _ . _ _ _ _ _ -
.
_
--
-
.
,
i
.
l
t
m apt, us. 50-259/73-2
-5-
i
i
I
i
y
t -
-cal cable Patting fbroe (50-259/72-2)
'
,
'
,
.
h &mp.
Control Bod Drive Piping (50-259/72-6)
i
No dange.
V.
Unusual occurrences
on December 28, 1972, subsequent to reactor pressure vessel (RPV)
,
internals vibration testing, wood debris was fotsid in the RPV.
!
Cleaning and flushing is being performed to remove the wooden
foreip materials frost the RPV and primary system loops.
(Datails II,
paIE.,. @ 4)
VI.
Other signficant Findings
,
fY.
'
A.
Project Status
,
a.1,
'
1.
Construction apprawi==tely 984 complete.
'L ., T
2.
Licensee's feel 1
g date - April 1, 1973.
3.
Licensee's
date - October 1,1973.
4.
Approximately 454 f the preoperational tests have been
oogleted with exceptions.
5.
None of the preoperational test results have rece17ed
the final TVA review and approval.
6.
Preoperational test procedure preparation and rework is
approximately 904 couplete.
7.
Startup Test procedures - G-E prepared procedures had
not yet been received at the site.
B.
Operational Procedure Status
A staanary of operational pxocedure statur as of January 18,
1973, is tabulated below.
$
Prepared
Approved
~
~ j
Operating Instructions
1004
1004
operating Instructions
1004
1004
Maintenance Instructions
684
154
Surveillance Instructions
944
754
1004
1004
Radiation Control Procedures
Site Ermrgency Plan
1004
1004
-
Technical Instructions
1004
82%
- Instructions are being reviewed and revised based on uso
during the preoperational test program and commitments de-
. . . -
-_
. . .
.--
__
__-.
. -
- . -
.
- -
_
-
- - - ------- -- - - -----
.- -- - - - - - -
--
-
,.
.
f
'
ED Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
-6-
l
30 Inspection Empert No. 50-259/72-11. Approximately
t oneplete.
,
- Instructicas to be revissed and revised.
(Details II,
,
pazegraph 2)
C.
Pomommel or Organisation Changes
]
Noas
VII.
=-- __-
-t Interview
A.
Pezscas present at the January 19, 1973, M===9===at Interview
1.
Tammessee valley Authority (Tvn)
Construction Diviaian (DEC)
..
,
R. T. Mathcote - Project Manager
E M. Price - Construction magina=r
B. * Gant - Assistant construction Engiamar
J. E. Wilkins - Startg and Test Sectica Swervi
,
,
E. Hilgensa - Construction A W atration
C. Holmes - Supervissr, Constructica Enginaaving Section
M. m. Sawyer - Assistant Starte and Test section supervisar
Division cf Power Prendurrtion (WP)
J. B. Stmoviard - Operations S gervisor
J. P. Groves - Assistant Plant Superintendent
W. H. Thompson - Modtanical Engineer
Division of Paper Resource Planning iT RP)
_
A. W. Crevsese - OperF+.ional QA Coordinator
H. L Call - QA Engineer
, 3.. M Electric Company (G-5)
,-
',;
5 Widner - Maata=1 h=' - : r
,,
7. D. Martin - Operatices Swerintendent
~*
.
B.
Scope of QA Program
..
The inspector stated that, based om discussions with DEC
and MD personnel, it appears that PsAR commitments to all
additional QA dociamentation requirements for critical piping
,
, - , _ _ .,
. . - . . , -
.- , . . , - . , _ _ _ . , . _ _ . , , . , . . , , ,
, . _ . , , . ,
.
, , - . , . , , _ , . _ , _ _ _ _ , _ , , . . , , , , , . . , , _ , , , , , _ , _ , , , . , _ , , , _ , , , . . ,
. n ,, c
.
'
.
.
l
'l
i
-7-
no we. no. 50-25s/73-2
,
'
i
t
been implemented by movisicas to general
specifiestione G-27 and 0-28.
The inspector
,
he would zequize addi*iamm1 time to evaluate
Fs&R commitments and TTA zesponse before being able to samfirm
.
'
resolution of this psoblem area.
(Details I, paraquegh 3)
,
l
,
Review and Maowal of Prooperational Test Results
i
c.
The inspector stated his comenza that nome of the completed
tests have received final TTA review and appsovel. This
I
i
could be a "bottlemo&" since this mast be completed, and
Regulatory Operations must review omrtain of the appsowed test
results befose fasi laading. The inopoeter stated that im
the ease of safety systems whis cammet be tested under
,
design eneditions, TTA must have analyses based on pse-
operatiemal test data that psess that the sa9 sty systems
,
'
will function satisfactasily in all of their unquised
modes of operaties. A mc representative inAimated
IED had been alerted to the need for timely final
approval and analysis of test results.
"'
D.
Emer-Y Opera *4== Instructions (301)
The inspector stated that TTA has made a commitment to
review and ggrade their E01's.
Specific criteria to be
considered in the review of the 301's were outlined. This
will be designated an unresolved item until review and
revision of the ECI's has been completed.
(Details II,
Paragraph 2)
'
1
TTA did not comment.
I
E.
System's Operating Status
The inspector stated that TVA has made a commitment to develop
a precahre to provide objectivt evidence of operating system's
states. This will be designated an tarssolved item until the
j
.
y
e .'
n Whidt definan this proceduze has been written.
II, parw@ 3)
/.y ,
'
q
, ,
. .
,
- $ &C not = t.
~
.,
'
F.
Wood Debris in the Primary System
The ir-p.cter stated that Region If would want ts review TTA's
'
report on the cleanup of wood debris in the primary system when
j
it becomes available and that this will be considered as an umgesolved j
item panding preparation and review of that repert.
(Detsf.ls II,
pare 7raph 4)
i
<
- . - . .
--
-
-. -
.
. - - - . . . . -
.
. . . - .
. - .
. . - - . . -
. . - - - .
- -
. -
O
.
.
ED M . No. 50-259/73-2
-6-
.
.,
. . .
y~
,. . - .x
2 j '-
'
~ ggk stated that the report would be available for review
after it is issued.
l
G.
Safety Guide 33
The inspector said that TVA has stated that they will meet
the intent of Safety Guide 33 with regard to written proce& ares
required for plant operations.
(Details II, paragraph 5)
TVA did not comment.
H.
Plant Operations Review Committee (704 Baview of Plant
Oge_ rational Instructices
,
i
- .
!
The inspector stated that TVA has reassured him that PORC
will review plant operational instrections in noso
with the provisions contained in s*==AmM Praction Eqp]-
(Details II, paragraph 6)
4* -
,
!
4
TVA did not cosament.
't
I
I.
Adherence to Plant Operating Instructions
The inspector stated that TVA's policy with regard to requiring
,
adherence to plant operating instructions has been tentatively
l
established.
(Details II, paragraph 7)
,
TVA did not comment.
J.
Periodic Review of P* ant Operating Instructions
!
The inspector stated that TVA's policy with regard to periodic
review of plant operating instructions has been tentatively
l
established.
(Details II, paragraph 8)
!
j
!
TVA did not ooseent.
i
i
-
l
E.
Boeummatation of Actions Required to Establish S*=W
- "4C e of safety Related Systems
The inspector stated that he has reviewed administrative
'
requirements established by TVA to require doctamentation of
satisfactory coupletion of steps reqbired to establish stan&y
readiness of safety related systems and he has no further
questions. Unresolved item 72-11/C is considered closed.
TVA did not comment.
'
,
1
- _ . . . .wsa
,4 % -'-W
l
.
.
. .
a
w
,
(
.
-
w
.
DO Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
-9-
xmal operating Instructions
!
On Jassary 29, 1973, the inspector advised TVA, via telephone,
!
of his comments with regard to two preliminary revised normal
operating instructions that were reviewed subsequent to the
inspection.
(Details II, paragraph 10)
,
!
M.
Health Physics Laboratory Hood
I
l
Management was informed that hood flow measurements and
instructions remain to be completed for hoods in the health
physics laboratory. Management agreed to followg on this
.
item.
(Details III, paragraph 3)
l
N.
Power Ascension Survey
l
l
Management was informed that a procedure covering the power
ascension radiation survey was not available for reviant,
,
~
e
and that it would be reviewed during fq1lowup in
Management agreed to f 6 lowup on this item.
(Detai
,
'
i
paracraph 4)
f-
O.
Radiation Monitor Installation and Testing
Management was informed that a review of th2 status of
radiation and constant air monitors revealed some progress
since the June 1972 inspection, but that preoperational
testing and installation of local ratameters, constant
l
air monitors and the drywell radiation monitor were incom-
!
plate. Management agreed to followup on this item.
(Details III, paragraph 5)
P.
Emergency Planning
Management was informed that inspection of emergency planning
revealed that emergency equipment had not been placed at onsite
locations as required by the TVA Radiological Emergency Plan.
Management agreed to followup on this item.
(Details III,
pairagraph 6)
Q.
Sampla Delivery Lines
,
Management was informed that shup bends had been observed
by inspectors in sample delivery lines installed for ventilation
exhaust and stack monitoring systeins. Management was also
inforced that corrugated hoses were provided for connection
of ventilation exhaust sample delivery lines to constant a_r
monitors. The inspector pointed out that no evaluation had been
made or planned to determine the amount of sasple loss in
!
5entilation exhaust sample delivery lines. Management agreed
to take care of the problem.
(Details III, paragraph 7)
I
,
I
_ _ _ _ . ,
..
. -
- - - - - -
. - - - - - - .
- - - - - -
,-.
, --. - - - ,
- - - , , _ . .
. - - - ~ , - - .
-
.
. .__
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___
ex
..
'
.
.
.
.
no apt. no. 50-259/73-2
-10-
san ==g====t was informed that the radioactive sources which
were being used to determine counting efficiencies of scaler
counting systess were e=allar in diameter than samples analysed
by these systems. Manage = ant weg further informed that no
evaluation of the effect of this diameter difference had been
made and no allowance for the differemen was being made during
sag le analysis. Management =<*==ledged this item.
(Details III,
paragraph 8)
s.
con +==ination Limits
'
Management was informed that there was an apparent need Sor
reconsideration of some of the radioactive contamination limits
specified by the TVA Hanhoek of Health Physia. The apparent
justification for this reconsideration was discussed briefly.
Management agreed to look into this matter.
(Details
paragraph 9)
T.
Review of Health Physics Procedures
.
Management was informed that 12 health physics y.4
s,
in addition to the Hanecok of Health Physics, had been
reviewed and found to be satir" : tory with minor exceptions.
It was pointed out that oosm _ .nts to initiate necessary
procedures changes to resolve these exceptions had been
received from a licensee representative.
(Details III,
paragraph 10)
U.
Faview of Additional HP Item
Management was informed that additional inspection effort
would be required on radiccheristry facilities, waste
i
sample analysis procedures and waste processing facilities.
l
^
, ' .
-;py
4
g
.,
.
4
1
s.;g.... .. ..
...aon .
un t ,
-
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
sumagt > VE.Li.tt e: k_
l ,,CEM rphy
_
, , _
,,
_
3/12/72
3////73
Dart >
,
_,
. . . .
.
.
.
..
.
Forss AfC.Ste (Rev. 9-53) ARCM 0240
e's
sea-is-eissa-s eeH7s
i
- . . - - -
.
. .
.
.
.
.
- -
. .
. . .
.
-
.
-
.
.
.
- .
.
-
- - - -
m-
..
, , ,
.
-
30 Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
I-1
MAR 131973
!
.
,sU*
gu
I
w.
l
_
Prepazed Bya
W. S. Little, Reactor Inspector
Date
r
_
'
' '
Pacilities Test and Startup
_
!
Brand
'
Dates of Inspection: January 18-19, 1 4 " "
l
c'MR 131973
'
novie,,ed .y
% s:%
C. s. murphy, Act%f1BLef
Date
j
Facilities Test and Startup
-
!
Branch
'
1.
Pessons Contacted
i
The following pereces were contacted in addition to those present
'
during the management interviews
j
!
l
a.
T=====see Valley Authority (TVA)
i
Corstruction Division (EEC)
7p
<
.
i
J. T. Walker - Nechanical Engineering Supervisor
-
,
,
i
R. W. Olson - Mechanical Engineer
C.'Rosear - Prooperational Test Engineer
.
Division of Power Pro & action (155P)
i
H. J. Green - Plant Superintendent
,
Division of Engineering Design (DED)
- L. D. Webber - QA Coordinator
- D. R. Patterson - Assistant Chief, Mechanical Design Branch
- J. Tolson - Mechanical Engineer
2.
Preccerational Test Program
^
s._ Z
_
__ . Preparation
"Esaetor Manual control mod Sequence Control System,"
,
-
besa written, but does not han TVA approval.
"
3-148, "Drywell and Pressure Suppression Containment Leak Rate
Test," has been written, but has not been approved by G-E or
TVA.
'Ihis revision resulted frca the+ tgreseents reached at the
TVA-Licensing meeting of December 6,1972.
.
i
!
Contacted by telephone on January 19, 1973.
i
'
l:
-- -- - . -
-
-
- - . -
-
- - -
, _
g
2 -
..
.~
.
-
'
i
!
W
259/73-2
I-2
!
!
.
.
..
TVA-13, TVA-23, and TVA-32 have been completed since the last
inspection. TVA considers testing for approximately 26 systems
to be complete, although approximately half of these have out-
standing exceptions to be resolved. Fourteen tests have been
started. None of the test results have received Mnal review
and approval.
3.
Scope of QA Program
In the AmenderAc 31 to the FSAR, TVA revised Table D.0-1 and the
ansa r to queetion Q D.3. to include additional structures,
systems, and components which are required by 10 CFR 50,
Appendix B, to be within the scope of the QA plan for design
and construction. Specifically, this constituent requires
additional QA doctamentation for these systems. h inspo
~-
aumerined revisions which have been made by TVA to
,
specifications G-28, " Construction of Piping Systems," and
G-27, " Quality Control for Construction of Piping Systems,"
discussed these revisiens with IED and DEC representatives.
inspector confirmed that the commitments for additional QA
documentation for piping systaan have been isp1===nted by
I
revisions to the construction specifications mentioned above.
It has not yet been confirmed that the PGAR commitments have
been iglemented for additional QA doceentation for air
handling systsens, secondary contain==nt and control rod housing
supports.
4.
Limitorque Operator Gear Failure
l
A IEC reprcsontative told the inspector of a pinion gear failure
that had occurred in two Limitorque valve operators, Model No.
SMB-!Pr. These operators were on the 24-inch MIR valves FCV-74-46
and FCV-74-52. The TVA investigation indicates that failure
ossazzed at the top of a keyway. The keyway was nachined so
h the born of the gear that very little material remained
-
he top of the keyway and the root diameter of the gear.
.^
the vener have solved the problem by redu,:ing the
.,
of the mating gear, increasing the clameter of the gear
' ' '
that failed, and reducing the depth of the keyway. All model No.
SMB-5T operators will be examined and corrective action will be taken.
,
, _ , . _ _ , . . . _ . , .
. . - . _ - . _ , . _ _ . .
m-.......--.-....
m
. . _ _ - , . . _ _ _ . . _ . , _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ . . , _ . _ . - , _ . _ . , . . . . , _ . - - - . . . , . - _ , . _ _ .
-
i
..
.~
.
I
I
ED Ept. No. 50-259/73-2
I-3
!
i
'
i
I
1
i
5.
!
u . nou ,1.d m m p.ctor h t va19e . - in
j
tus 24-imah Walworth valves in the EER system (FCV-74-53 and
l
NCV-74-47) had bent during operation. h vendor has indicated
that the unive stem material is of inadequate strength and
l
a new stronger material.
G-E and TV1 have a=had the
j
vendor apr a stress analysis of the im13e hear to show that the
valve will met be overstzessed, before the ==Any's fir will be
,
j
assoptable. This win be sollowed is in the neat inspection.
6.
Tasset ansk melief valve Modificaticas
!
i
All of the usin stsam zalief valves had been retusned to the
asamfacturer Sor modification and tests (Beport Mos. 259/72-2
and 72-4) to correct deficiencies found at other boiling water
reactoss. Some of these valves have recently been zetussed to
the site and the remainder soon will be, h 4 ; x;.g asked
,
I
a EBC representative for a full report of the modifications
and the testing conducted on the valves. This information a
be available at the site on the next inspection.
,
'
7.
ECIC and HPCI Turbine Ezhaust Line Modifications
N installation of diffusers ce the end of the tuzbine ezhaust
lines appeazed to be complete. A EEC
representative stated that
tests will be run on January 22 and 23, 1973, to determine if
vacumn breaker valves azu needed to prevent water hanumer. h
inspector emphasised the need for a complete report of the problem
l
and its resolution.
.
8.
Operational Quality Assurance Program
h TVA Operational Quality Assurance Manual (OQAM) is written
to assure quality in operation and maintenance of TVA's neslear
power plants and, in doing this, TVA has written the manual as
if it were specifically applicable to Browns Ferry Nuclear
j
4the Browns Ferry Standmed Practice Manual
.
part, ". . . the plant staff aest not leek upes any
manual as instruction unless it is distributed
established plant documents. Plant
implementing the Quality Assurance Manual will
!
nosmally be in the form of standard practices." In the lidtt
'
of this situation, the insposter asked a Est, representatis der
j
a list of all plant instructicas which have been or will be written
which implement the OQAM, keying the instructions to the psoper
sections of the OQAM. h EFF representative indicated that it
will be approxir:ately two weeks before this list can be
developed. This will be inspected during the next inspection.
I
i
i
l
l
'
?
l
r
i
_ _ - . _ _ . ,
_ - . _ - _ . _ _ . . . , _ _ _ _ _
_ . _ , . , _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ , _ - _ . , _ , . . _ . . _ , . . . _ .
.
_ _. _ _., _ _)
__
_
_
_ _
__
.
.
.
.
l
-
RD RPt. No. 50-259/73-2
I -4
4
9.-
dures
.
.
. ...
A
ve stated that the procedurus had been received
in Chattanooga and were being reviewed by TVA, but none have been
received at the site.
10. A&iinistrative control of the Startup Test Program
The standard practices on this subject had been issued inunediately
before the inspection. The inspector will review and discuss any
1
comments at the next inspection.
-l.
'
,
!
.;c'
--
..
ya
ee
l
omer > 20.dJ.....
.PD d
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . .
...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. - .
r
\\
WSLit
CEMu hy
sunnApr >
.
. . . . . . . .
. .
,
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . _ .
.
oA?r >
.. .
.
. .! .
=.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Form AEC.)ls (Rev.9 53) AICM 0240
en-to-es **H
- eMrs
t
.,--,--
_ . -
--
,. , . - _ - _
. . . _ . _ _ . . - , ..
, - , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ , . _ , . . . . - _ _ _ . - , - ,
&
..
-
.
.
.,,
II-1
e,#.a.es =
R8
9 873
R, C, ParkW.
Dm
Prepared By:
R. C. Parker
Date
f
Reactor Inspector
,
Facilities Test and Startup
l
Branch
l
I
Dates of Inspection: January 17-19, 1973
- * *
FEB 12 W
Reviewed By:
C8 %
C. E. Murphy Acting
Data
Chief. Facilities Test
and Startup Branch
i
l
-
1
'
!
1.
Individuals Contacted
Tann=asse Valley Authority (TVA)
.
.
Division of Power Production (DPP)_
H. J. Green - Plant Superintendent
J. F. Groves - Assistant Plant Superintendent
J. B. Studdard - Operations Supervisor
l
R. G. Mstka - Results Supervisor
!
!
Di'rision of Construction (DEC)_
.
I
J. T. Walker - Mechanical Engineering Supervisor
,
R. W. Olson - Mechanical Engineer
i
2.
Emergency Operating Instructions.(E0I)_
l
Several E01's were reviewed in the Region II office prior to the
inspection and were generally found to be inadequate. The inspector's
'
findings and specific comments and questions pertaining to three E01's
were discussed with TVA representatives. TVA stated that they would
review and upgrade all their E01's with particular emphasis on the
.
!
,
,
j
,
.
l
ghas the E0I's are adequate in light of plant design changes.
.
y-
i
b.
' that'the E01's are adequate in light of additional plant
'
knowledge that operations personnel have gained since the original
f
draft of the E0I's.
. , ,
i
r
Insure that where E0I's prescribe operations to be performed,
!
c.
,
i
!
i
1
- _ _ _ _ _ _ - -.
--
. . .
- -
-
- -
-
. - -
-
-
m-
.
l
30 Empert No. 50-259/73-2
II-2
l.
elves require a separate operational instruction to
the E01 will veference or identify that instruction.
--
Insure that the E0I's identify specific parameters or plant
'
d.
i
conditions which an operator should observe in order to evaluate
the emergency, and the specific actions required of the operator
based on those observations which are required to mitigate the
emergency conditions and to put the plant in a safe condition.
Raview and upgrading of EOI's will be designated an unresc1ved item and
!
revised E01's will be reviewed by an inspector.
3.
System's Operatina Status
\\*
The inspector discussed with TVA representatives the importance of
having some means for maintaining objective evidence of plant system's
,
operating status to facilitate verification of system operability on
various checklists and for determination of plant operating
'
TVA stated that they were in the process of
j
given time.
a system and that they would write an =Aministrative inst
define the mechanics and operational requirements of the
-,
will be designated an unresolved item until the administrat
!
has been prepared.
1
4.
Wood Debris in the Primary System _
On December 28, 1973, subsequent to reactor pressure vessel (RFV) internals
vibration testing and following removal of the RFV head and steam dryer
The RFV vos
assemblies, wood debris was observed floating in the EFV.
drained to facilitate inspection and cleanup of the RFV internals, and on
,
29, 1973, TVA informed Region II of the incident via telephone.
December
Cleanup of the wood debris was still in progress at the time of this
TVA stated that after the cleanup has been completed, a
inspection.
report describing the incident and cleanup effort will be prepared and
The cleanup effort, to date, is summarized
made available to the inspector.
below:
$sking and vacuuming of wood debris in the RFV with the
h d.
Yning of the RPV and primary system loops with temporary strainers
installed over the recirculation outlet nossles.
Flushing of the RPV and primary systpm loops through the condensate
c.
domineralizers.
,
Remove control rods and clean control rod guide tubes and the area
d.
i
i
.- . , _ . - . . _ _ _ _ .
. _ . . _ _
_ , _ . . - . , _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . - _ - _ . _ - , _ _ _ . . . - . _ _ . _ _ - , _ - . _ _ - . . . _ , , . . . ,
__
__
_ _
_ _
_
_
_ _ _ _
_
-
_ _
..
.
.
RO Report No. 50-259/73-2
II-3
'
i
!
really be under the control rod velocity limiter.
l
on was in progress at the time of the inspection.)
i
A plywood disc approximately 20 inches in diameter and 1/2-inch thick
j
was reconstructed from the larger pieces of wood debris recovered from
the RFV. At this time. TVA believes that the wood piece was in the RFY
i
prior to performing the vibrations testing. Cleanup of wood debris will
'
[
be designated an unresolved item until an inspector has reviewed TVA's
l
report describing the incident and cleanup operation.
!
I
5.
Safety Guide 33
i
l
l
TVA was asked what their intentions were with regard to having operational
l
l
instructions identified in Appendix A to Safety Guide 33. TVA stated that
l
they were aware of the guidance provided by Safety Guide 33 and were in the
process of auditing their procedure system to determine where they stand
!
'
with regard to having instructions identified in Appendix A.
In addition,
TVA stated they would meet the intent of Safety Guide 33 by
!
instructions identified in Appendix A or they would be prope
why a given instruction would not be necessary at Browns Fe
"
i
6.
Plant
rations Review Committee PORC Review of Plant
r
Instructions
Standard Practice BFA2, " Preparation and Use of Plant Instructions," defines
the significant aspects to be considered in the preparation and review
i
of each plant instruction and it requires that in preparing sad reviewing
operational instructions, supervisors shall be constantly vigilant to
i
l
l
insure the applicable requirements of the FSAR, legislative and regulatory
l
requirements, recognised standards, and the BFNP Standard Practices are
'
met. The inspector apprised TVA that PORC should be more rigorous in
their review, as defined in Standard Practice BFA2, of plant instructions
!
i
to identify instruction weaknesses and deficiencies. TVA assured the
inspector that PORC will review plant operational instructions in
accordance with the provisions contained in Standard Practice BFA2 and
l
that the provisions of Stsndard Practice BFA2 would be reemphasised to
the members of PORC.
,p
7.
t
rati
Instructions
j
-
t,
,,
with TVA, the inspector stated that based on the
i
in
ion contained in Standard Practice BFA2, of December 14, 1972,
l
it was not clear to him when an operator would be required to strictly
j
adhere to plant operational instructions ra,ther than rely on memory.
TVA stated that BFA2 would be reworded so as to make it clear when an
i
i
I
operator would be required to adhere to an operational instruction. The
!
inspector stated that unresolved item 72-11/A would remain open until
!
the revision to BFA2 is issued.
I
.,,.n__,,.,
..n,~,-
---
_
- - -
- - .
- - - - - , ,
--_,___ - --_ _ .
n, , , , , -
. . - . ,
__---_,n,_
n-,
_,
__ _
__
_
_ __ _ _
..
.
.
l
R0 Report No. 50-259/73-2
II-4
l
l
-
)
1
i
8
f Plant
rati
Instructions
l
IG
-
. . ,
ey with regard to periodic review of plant operating
instructions was discussed and TVA stated that they would have
i
a formal program that would require operating instructions to be
critically reviewed by operating personnel periodically. The
findings of the review conducted by operating personnel will be
,
!
reviewed by PORC and changes to instructions made as necessary.
The inspector stated that he had no objection to such a system
but unresolved item 72-11/B would remain open until the program
is promulgated in the Standard Practices.
9.
Surveillance. Maintenance, and Technical Instructions
The inspector had reviewed five surveillance, one technical, and five
'
maintenance instructions in the Region II office prior to the
inspection and had minor coimaants and questions with regard to
l
these instructions. These coauments were discussed with TVA
representatives and resolved. The inspector stated that TVA
should be alert to identify and correct minor deficiencies s
.
l
as those he had identified during the early phases of plant
3 .
,
i
operation.
t.
10. Revised Normal Operating Instructions (OI)_
i
Preliminary copies of two revised OI's were made available to
'
the inspector during the inspection. These OI's were reviewed
in the Region II office subsequent to the inspection. Types of
,
i
deficiencies previously dentified in OI's were generally found
!
'
to have been corrected.l_
However, certain of the abnorma?
i
operations described in the 01's did not provide ghe operator
I
with specific guidance as to what the operator should observe
or what specific operator action is required. Additionally,
in one of the OI's, instructions describing automatic startup,
l
manual startup and manual startup for surv4111ance testing of
I
l
the system were intermingled in one section of the OI, titled,
i
"Startup - Auto Initiation."
-
. . -
.
the inspector's findings with regard to
'
N
29, 1973,
'
l
1rreliminary revised OI's were discussed with TVA via
'
!
The inspector apprised TVA of the necessity to
.
I
assure that abnormal operations described in the OI's contain
{
adequately detailed instructions to the operator, and that
,
..
1] b Inspection Report No. 50-259/72-11, Details II, paragraph 2.
I
\\
l
.-_
-. . . _ . . _ _ _ _ - _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ . ..._... --.
... .-
- . - - . - -
.
. - . - -. . -
- . . - .
.
..
'
..
-
.
.
.
RO Report No. 50-259/73-2
II-5
..
.a
taas pertaining to diffarent operations should not
be intermingled within the OI's.
TVA stated that
they would taka the inspector's consnents into consideration.
.
..
.
.
-
..
T
RO : II'd\\ ,
.l.. RO:II
. . . .
. . . . . . . .
..
, , . . . _
I
. . . . .
omct >
..
..L\\1..
. . . .
. . . . . . . _
RCParker:pv
C u phy:pv
sunu ut ,
. . g , . , , 3. ..
..; . . . g ,, y7 7 3. __
..
.
.
.
. .
..
. .
_ _ .
L=
a
._
eair >
.................!........................................
...
. - i. - . i ... - .. . , r e
r-= Atc.ne in .s.us etc.x o.:o
__
__
.-
..
'
.
.
I
30 apt. No. 54-259/7F2
III-1
Crio;ui sign.d b
FEB 2 61913
4. r. c.e..a
.
Prepared by:
l'
3 ' - * *
A. F. Gibson
Date
Radiation Specialist
.
nadialest=1 ==d
l
Envir amental
Protestima Branch
-
.
i
- 5* ' "
FEB 2 g 1973
W. W. Poort
W. W. Peary
Data
Radiation Spesialist
Radiological and
Euvir=====*=1
Protectima Branch
Dates of Inspect g t, f y 16-19, 1973
i
.
4 L ww
n.wie d by:
FEB z. c 1973
J. T. Sutherland
Asting Chief
Radiological and
,,17
-
,,
....
'
Protectism Bransh
1.
Individuals Contacted
Ben Gant - TVA-DEC - Assistant Construction Engineer
Curtis Holmes - TVA-DEC - Supervisor, Construction Engineering Section
H. J. Green - TVA-DPP - Plant Superintendent
R. C. Mstka - TVA-DPP - Supervisor, Easults faction
Matthew Lyon - T7A-DEP - Health Physics Supervisor, Radiation Control
Section
2.
Orsanisational Channes
Noca
3.
Health Physics Laboratory used
A-
sepossestative stated that the flow on the hood in the health
.rr b . h.en
asor.d a the p
t, ho.e,.r, th u
e .ot
er tantractions issued as to window positions related to flows.
!
' The liseases representative stated that flows will be re-eassured and
instruction posted as to window position related to air flev prior to
fuel loading.
,.
l
_ _ _ _ _
_ _ - - - . .
-.
. . . - - - -
- - . . .
.
-
-
-
. _
.
. . _ . - . . . . _ _ _
_
_
.
_
_ _ _
l
..
. *
k
i
no tyt. Es. 50-259/73-2
III-2
'
4
i
I
l
}
4 .-
,
.
)
~~ra
'
I
A
ar responsible for radiation survey procedures
'
stated thw a pro 6Tdure covering. Power Aseension Radiation Surveys,
uns not yet avaite 1e. He said that ameh of the material to be innleded
'
in this passadore is to be obtained from the centractor. Be further
stated th6e this procedure would be cog leted by start-up tias. He and
,
,
====g====t were made aware of our need to review this completed procedure,
i
!
5.
Process gl Area Monitorina Facilities
.
A liaeases representative stated that the following instrimmente
a.
lid been fast =11ad and preoperationally tested since the June 2972
isspecti m . A risual cheek by inspostors of several of these instre-
a wts indicated that their status sea as reported.
J
'
(1) Area Radiation Monitors:
Iastrument numbers U -90-1 thru
H-90-32 and 1E-90-35 thru U-90-41.
.
.
j
.
. . .#
(2) Main Steam Line Radiation Monitoring Systems Inst
i
'
numbers RE-90-136 thru RE-90-139.
. (: i
'
,,
. . .
j
.
_
_
'
(3) Air Ejector Offges Radiation Monitoring Systems Instrimment
'
numbers RE-90-157. RE-90-158 and RE-90-160.
(4) Main Stack Radiation Monitoring System: Instrissent numbers
RI-90-147 and RE-90-144.
l
4
!
(5) Rasetor Building Ventilation Radiation Monitoring System
Instrument numbers 15-90-140 thru RE-90-143.
l
'
I
(6) Process Liquid Radiation Monitoring Systems Instrument
l
numbers RE-90-130 thru RE-90-134.
.
b.
A licensee representative stated that the following items were
I
incomplates
t
I
Isosi Ratemeters: Instrument numbers RE-90-63 thru 15-90-75
'
!
"RS-90-44 and RN-90-45. These instruments had not been
'
Q ; b_ ;-r ionally tested or placed at monitoring stations. representativ
A
'
!
!
tested and placed at monitoring stations just prior to fuel
'
I
loading.
i
(2) Constant Air Monitors:
Instrument h ers RE-90-250 thru
(
l
RE-90-251. These instruments had not been preoperationally
-
f
tested or installed. A licenses representative stated that
,
'
.
I
l
[
!
.
. .
!
. ._ . ._
-
. - _
._
__. . .
. _ _ .
__
_
,
.-
%
.
,
.
.
,i
.
EO Ept. Ms. 50-239/73-2
III-3
k
.
of these instruments would begin in about one month
about one day would be required to test and install
rument.
l
,
,
e
(3) Drywell Radiation Monitor
Instrument number 3E-90-256.
~
A licenses representative stated that this instrument would
I
i
mot be operationally tested until construction work in the
c. - til was completed. The licensee representative estimated
tt * the dryvell monitor would be tested in about six weeks.
i
6.
Basraeacy klaanins
)
a.
During this inspection visits were made to the offices of
-)
three different county sheriffs who are included in the licensee's
l
,
emergency p1 - 4=g.
On February 14, 1973, visits were ande to the
,,
Alabama Department of Public Bealth, Division of Radiological Health
4'
and to the Alabama Department of Public Safety. Righuey Patrol
j'
'
Division. This completes visits to outside agencies.
d
4.,.
..i.) ,
b.
A licensee representative stated that plar==ane of emergeasy
.J
ment at designated on site locations as required by the TTA
n
logical Emergency Plan was scheduled to be completed just prior
7
fuel loading. The schedule is designed to assure that enest
- ' g. M
work at the designated locations is completed prior to placesset of
J,
the emergency equipment.
).
-
7.
Sample Delivery Lines
The inspectors observed sharp bands in sample delivery lines for the
stack and ventilation monitoring systems. Corrugated hoses were provided
for connecting constant air monitors to ventilation sample delivery liams.
During discussions with a licensee representative, the inspectors potated
out that since significant sample losses can occur in sharp bands and
corrugated hoses, it did not appear that sample losses were being minimimed.
A licensee representative mekameledged this problem and stated that it
should be referred to =amagament for resolution. A licenses representative
stated that semple losses in sampling lines associated with the stack asai-
tortag system would be evaluated prior to plant operation but me evaluation
of ventilation exhaust symple line lesses was planned. Nenagement agreed,
,
a telephone conversation following this inspection, to consider
of sample losses in ventilation exhaust sample delivery lines.
'
4
8.
Differences in Sample and Source Diameters
l
Disensaions with a licenses representative' revealed that a one inch
diameter radioactive source was being used to determine counting
afficiencies of GM and proportional detector scalar systems. A licensee
i
i
representative stated that smear and particulate filter saseles analysed
I
1
.
Db
.
,
.
30 Byt. Es. 50.-259/73-2
III-4
I
were 15/8 inches and 2 inehas respectively in dimoster.
I
es did not enke all - = for these geometry differences.
i
!
!
isted out that these geometry differences could be en-
l
posted to cease the sealer systems to have different eeusting offisiemeles
4
!
j
for seurons and emples. The lieensee representative stated that, in his
i
i
opiates, the differenees in source and sample eises would not osotribute
I
signifissat error to analysis results. Be supported this opiaise by stating:
(1) h 23 geometry of the proportional detectors would samme sousting
i
i
Jfiaisestes to be nearly ladopendent of sourse diameter; and (2) the
,
et system womid be used only for senar analysis and that error sameed by
,
!
different seures and sample diameters would be eas11 relative to other
i
errors assoaisted with the smear survey teshaique. The tempestors stated
i
that error caused by different soures and sample eises shoald be eliminated
by using sources and samples of the same size er the differesse is eeunting ;
,
!
officiametes due to use of different size soareas and samples should be
!
dotarained and analysis resulta adjusted to compensate for this differenee.
j
Licensee representatives stated during ed:z r telephsos eenversatians
3
l
that a matheastical evaluation of the effect of differummes
sampla diameters on counting efficiencies was being made.
!
!
9.
Costandmation Limits
i
!
a.. Shoes were listed as an iten under C-Zone clothing in Table 9 of the
4
!
TTA Esodbook of Bealth Physics. A licensee representative emplaimed
that this ites applied to personal shoes restricted to co=*mmi=mtion
i
senes and not to rubber over-shoes. h inspectors stated that it
I
uma mot apparent why the transferable limits specified for the inside
!
of these shoes is hisbar than the limits for skin. During a telephone
)
conversation following this inspection, a licensee representative stated
that Table 9 had been changed to resolve this esammat.
b.
Table 9 of the TVA Bandbook of Health Physics required clearance items
(such as tools and equipment) to meet 1caer direct survey beta-seman
I
limits than skin of the whole body. The inspectors questioned the
justification for allowing higher conta-immeion levels on skin than
i
clearance items. During a telephone conversation follawing this inspec-
ties, a 11eense representative stated that Table 9 had been abanged to
p comment.
%
i
Procedures
c
,
ydysicsprocedureswerereviewedandfoundtobesatisfse-
tory with minor ezeeptions. Precedure esamments were discussed with a
1
)
licensee representative who agreed to init4te necessary changes to resolve thes
1
.
,i
j
RO:II
RO:II
RO:II
AFGibson:pv
WPeery:pv
JTSutherland:pv
1
2/26/73
2/26/73
2/26/73
!
1
I
1
.-
- .- - - . . - -
--
~
. -
. .
_ _ - _ - _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
____ ______ __
_
-
r
.
,
l
.
.
'
l
Authoritr
MAR 151973
,
1:
.
,
.,m
l
30 Report No. 50-259/73-2
I
oc w/enel:
J. G. Esppler, RO
J. B. Eenderson, RO
l
R0:54 (5)
,
l
DR Central Files
'
Restintory Standards (3)
Directorate of Licensing (13)
l
cc enel. only:
i
- PDR
i
'Losal PDR
'ESTC
'UYIE, OR
-
i..
{
' state
<r.,
~ . ' ,
{
l
'To be dispatched at a later date.
.
N$
.
!
l
i
p
.
---