ML20213G976
| ML20213G976 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1987 |
| From: | Zech G NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS |
| To: | Liaw B NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS |
| References | |
| TAC-R00110, TAC-R00111, TAC-R110, TAC-R111, NUDOCS 8705190073 | |
| Download: ML20213G976 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000327/1986042
Text
D$.l uA
,.
N
MAY 0 41987
MEMORANDUM FOR
B. D. Liaw, Assistant Director, Technical Review
Division of TVA Projects, Office of Special Programs
~
FROM:
Gary G. Zech, Assistant Director, Inspection Programs,
Division of TVA Projects, Office of Special Progre.ms
SUBJECT:
ASCO SOLEN 0ID VIOLATION 86-42-01
.
Two examples of Violation 86-42-01 were cited in Inspection Report 86-42
pertaining to ASCO solenoid valves (one on seismic qualification, one on
environmental qualification). These issues resulted from two unresolved items
identified in Inspection Report 85-45 and later reviewed in Inspection Report
'
86-01.
These items were upgraded to violations in Inspection Report 86-42.
TVA responded to the violation on October 24, 1986, by admitting the first
example of 86-42-01 pertaining to the seismic qualification, but denied the
second example pertaining to environmental qualification.
A request for
technical assistance was sent from myself to Brian Grimes on December 5, 1986,
to evaluate the environmental qualification issues addressed in Report 86-42
as Violation 86-42-01 and Unresolved Item 86-42-02.
George Hubbard evaluated these issues during his inspection reported in
Inspection Report 86-70 on December 12, 1986, and addressed these issues in a
Grimes memorandum dated January 16, 1987, which concluded that the violation
was valid. We issued a response to TVA's denial of October 24, 1986, based on
the January 16, 1987, Grimes' memorandum refuting TVA's denial an February 26,
1987
TVA on April 6,1987, again denied the violation. George Hubbard has
recently discussed the second denial with TVA. In light of this second denial,
please evaluate this EQ issue from a technical standpoint and determine if
TVA's denial is valid based on the NRC's EQ policy.
If you consider that
TVA's denial is not valid, please prepare a draft response to TVA that
represents how you believe the NRC should respond to this denial.
It is requested that you respond to this memorandum by May 22, 1987, to support
completion of Sequoyah inspection activities.
ORIGINAL. SIGNED BY
KENNET" 9 VRR
,
'l
M Gary G. Zech
1
Enclosures:
1.
Inspection Report 86-42
2.
TVA first denial
.
3.
Grimes memorandum
4.
RII response to TVA
5.
TVA second denial
,
l
cc w/o encls:
(See page 2)
!
B705190073 870504
ADOCK 05000327
G
'
'
I
.
_
- - _ . - - _ - - , . - _ - , _ - _ -
_
_ - _
,
c .. %
B. D. Liaw
2
AIAY 0 41967
.
cc w/o encis:
/H. L.'Abercrombie, Site Director
>
.Sequoyah Nuclear Plant
/
'
tJ. A. Kirkebo, Acting Director,
.d.NuclearEngineering
'L. Gridley, Director
Nuclear Safety and Licensing
/M. R. Harding, Site Licensing
Manager
bec w/o encls:
/). G. Keppler, OSP
/S. D. Ebneter, OSP
/J.A.Zwolinski,OSP
/S. D. Richardson, OSP
/S. R. . Connelly, OIA
K. P. Barr, OSP/RII
yNRCResidentInspector-
NRC Document Control Desk
State of Tennessee
.e
!
.
L
$
L
-OSP/RII
'OSP/R-
05?/RII
-
JBA
-
%
'
JBrady
FMc' Coy
K
r
4/ 0/87
4 y B7
4/rt/87
3
. - . .
- .
- ~
.-
. _ , _ . . . . - _ _ . . _ _ , _ . _ _ , . _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ , . ., _ _,._.___ _ _ ___ __,_,_ _ __, _ _ . _ _ , _ ,
.__
,__
_
_
_