|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Adams | | {{Adams |
| | number = ML20215L089 | | | number = ML20210E347 |
| | issue date = 10/17/1986 | | | issue date = 01/12/1987 |
| | title = Insp Repts 50-321/86-28 & 50-366/86-28 on 860830-0920. Violation Noted:Failure to Comply W/Tech Spec Surveillance Requirement & Failure to Perform Surveillance within Required Tech Spec Frequency | | | title = Ack Receipt Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-321/86-28, 50-321/86-33.50-366/86-28 & 50-366/86-33.Addl Info on Violation B Re Surveillance Due Dates Requested in 30 Days |
| | author name = Holmesray P, Ignatonis A, Nejelt G | | | author name = Grace J |
| | author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) | | | author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| | addressee name = | | | addressee name = Miller J |
| | addressee affiliation = | | | addressee affiliation = GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| | docket = 05000321, 05000366 | | | docket = 05000321, 05000366 |
| | license number = | | | license number = |
| | contact person = | | | contact person = |
| | document report number = 50-321-86-28, 50-366-86-28, NUDOCS 8610280462 | | | document report number = NUDOCS 8702100285 |
| | package number = ML20215L078 | | | title reference date = 12-12-1986 |
| | document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS | | | document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE |
| | page count = 9 | | | page count = 4 |
| }} | | }} |
|
| |
|
| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:- - | | {{#Wiki_filter:( & U |
| -, ,
| | .. |
| . .
| | C JAN 121987 Georgia /owerCompany ATTN: VMr. J. H. Miller, J President P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Gentlemen: |
| UNITED STATES
| | SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-321/86-28, 50-321/86-33, 50-366/86-28, AND 50-366/86-33 Thank you for your response of December 12, 1986, to our Notice of Violation issued on November 7, 1986, concerning activities conducted at your Hatch facility under NRC License Nos. OPR-57 and NPF-5. We are ualuating your response and would like more information concerning activities at Hatc In your response to Violations A and B, you state that the events "had no actual or potential safety consequences." We believe your position is not correct since the violations do involve potential safety consequences. The Unit I and Unit 2 Technical Specifications (TS) basis states that the TS requirements in this area ersure "the calculated doses would be less than the allowable levels stated in Criterion 19 of the General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50." Criterion 19 requires that a control room shall be provided from which actions can be taken to maintain the reactor in a safe condition under accident conditions and adequate radiation protection shall be provided to permit . access and occupancy of the control room under accident conditions. Failing to verify the operability of the main control room ventilation system in accordance with the TS as described in Violations A and B does involve potential safety consequences since actions to mitigate the effects of an accident may be impaired due to a lack of control room habitabilit Violation A Response In your response to Violation A, you imply the system was found to be satisfactory when the surveillance test was performed on September 26, 1986. We believe the actual as-found system flow was out of specification and had to be adjusted to be within the TS limit Also in your response to Violation A, you do not address the basic problem of not providing adequate detail in your procedure to ensure compliance with TS requirements. This problem was also evident in the Unit 1 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) day tank (volume) conversion problem discussed in Inspection Report 86-3 Inspection Report 86-33 requested that you discuss the cause and corrective actions relating to the Unit 1 EDG day tank (volume) conversion problem. Your response addressed the immediate corrective actions but did not provide any explanations as to the cause of the problem. The corrective actions did not 8702100285 870112 PDR ADOCK 05000321 G PDR g Il l |
| [>2 Krig #
| | IEoj |
| 'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION ll
| |
| [' ,
| |
| 101 MARIETTA STREET, *', ,j c ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
| |
| \,...../
| |
| Report Numbers: 50-321/86-28 and 50-366/86-28 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket Numbers: 50-321 and 50-366 License Numbers: DPR-57 and NPF-5 Facility Name: Hatch 1 and 2 Inspection Dates: August 30 - September 20, 1986 Inspection at Hatch site near Baxley, Georgia Inspectors: /kdA d, m[e /4// ry/r/
| |
| PeterHolets-faf,565iorResidentInspector Dtte Signed Ad is dis n/i7/sz Date Signed o Gregory K/ NejfgJt, Resident Inspector Appraved by: /7 O < -[b [d, /o// 7/r/; '
| |
| A. J. Ignpfnis, (Chfef,~ ~ Project Section 3B Dat~e Sfgned Division of Reactof Projects SUMMARY Scope: This routine inspection was conducted at the site in the areas of Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters, Operational Safety Verification, Maintenance Observation, Surveillance Observation, Plant Modification Observa-tion, Engineering Safety Feature System Walkdown, and Reportable Occurrence Results: Two violations were identified - procedural inadequacy resulting in failure to comply with a' Technical Specification (TS) surveillance requirement; and failure to perform surveillance within the required TS frequenc go280462 eslogo O ADOCK 05000321 PDR | |
|
| |
|
| _
| | , u Georgia Power Company 2 JAN 12 B87 address the more basic problem of inadequate procedures and failure to follow procedures. For example, how has this procedure been performed in the past since personnel could not verify the day tank level using the guage, and what actions will be taken to minimize these types of procedural deficiencies in other instructions? |
| *
| | Violation B Response In your response to Violation B, you state that personnel error contributed to the violation and surveillance "due dates" were incorrectly assigned based upon the operating cycle completion date. We would like more detail on the nature of the personnel error and on any procedures you may have to provide guidance in scheduling surveillances which were in existence at that time or are in place at this tim You stated that I&C personnel documented satisfactory performance of the surveillance test on December 6, 1985. At the time of the inspection, this documentation was not available. The resident inspectors will verify the documentation you state exists in the follow-up of this violatio Also in your response to Violation B, you discuss how frequency " changes" are independently verified since the strengthening of the program in May 1985. You also state that since the surveillance test in question has been performed within the required frequency since the changes in 1985, these previous changes will preclude this occurrence. It is not clear to us that the missed surveillances addressed in Violation B occurred due to frequency " changes." In your description of the reason for Violation B, you assign personnel error and Unit 1/ Unit 2 TS differences, but no mention is made of problems due to frequency changes. It does not appear that the changes made in May 1985 constituted corrective steps for Violation Also under corrective steps taken, you state you now schedule surveillance due dates based upon the previous "due" date of the surveillance and not " solely" upon the operating cycle completion date. This implies that you still use the operating cycle completion dates in some way to arrive at the surveillance due dates and we would like more information on how the due date is scheduled. Also, it appears that scheduling a surveillance due date based on the previous due date may lead to further violations of the specified frequencies. If a surveillance test is performed earlier than the due date and the next test is scheduled based on the due date instead of the actual performance date, then the required frequency will be exceeded if the 125 percent allowable interval is used. It appears that it would be more appropriate to schedule the next surveillance test based on the actual performance dat Under corrective steps which will be taken to prevent recurrence, you state "No further corrective steps are necessary beyond the performance of the procedure at its next due date in order to be in compliance with the 3.25 times 18-month surveillance interval." This addresses the next surveillance but does not ensure future tests will be scheduled within the TS required 3.25 times the specified interval for this or other surveillance test In summary, we would like additional information in the following area . What is the justification for considering the violations to have no potential safety consequences? |
| .
| | I |
| .
| |
| REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
| |
| *H. C. Nix, Site General Manager T. Greene, Deputy Site General Manager | |
| *P. R. Bemis, Manager Engineering Liaison Department | |
| *H. L. Sumner, Operations Manager
| |
| *T. Seitz, Maintenance Manager
| |
| *T. R. Powers, Engineering Manager R. W. Zavadoski, Pealth Physics and Chemistry Manager 0. M. Fraser, Site Quality Assurance (QA) Manager (Acting)
| |
| C. T. Moore, Training Manager
| |
| *S. B. Tipps, Superintendent of Regulatory Compliance Other licensee errployees contacted included technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members and office personne * Attended exit interview ExitInterview(30703)
| |
| The inspection scope and findings were sumarized on September 22, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio Two violations were identified. The licensee acknowledged the finding and took no' exceptio (0 pen) Violation 50-321,366/86-28-01 - The control room filter train differential pressure test procedure did not provide an acceptance criterion needed to determine the volumetric flow rate. This resulted in a failure to meet the flow requirements for this test (paragraph 6).
| |
|
| |
|
| (0 pen) Violation 50-321,366/86-28-02 - Surveillance fre room filter train exceeded the TS required frequency.paragraph (quency6). | | . 0 Georgia Power Company 3 JAN 121987 Was the as-found flowrate on September 26, 1986, outside the TS required flowrate? Will your Procedure Upgrade Program (PUP) or other programs ensure that procedures can be performed to meet TS requirements and contain adequate detail to prevent occurrences like Violation A and the EDG day tank level problem? What was the cause of the EDG day tank level problem (i.e., had the gauge been replaced recently, procedure changed, etc.)? 1 How has this procedure been performed in the past, since personnel could not verify the day tank level using the gauge? Have there been and are there any procedures which provide guidance in scheduling surveillances? What are the details of personnel error involved with Violation A? { How does the May 1985 change to the Technical Specification surveillance scheduling program revision process constitute a corrective step for Violation B (i.e., was this violation due to a frequency change)? Are surveillance due dates scheduled using operating cycle completion dates? |
| | If so, what means are in place for not exceeding the TS required frequency? |
| | 10. .How will you prevent exceeding the TS required frequency using previous due dates vice actual completion dates to schedule the next surveillance tests? |
| | 11. How will you prevent exceeding the 3.25 times the surveillance interval for future surveillance tests in general? |
| | Please provide the above information within 30 days of receipt of this lette In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Feaeral Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roo The responses directed by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-51 Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact u |
|
| |
|
| of the control Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)
| | Sincerely, Original signed by/ |
| Licensee's actions on previous enforcement natters that have been taken were determined to be acceptable by the inspector verifying the licensee's response with no discrepancies noted for the following violations and unresolved item:
| | J. Nelson Grace J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator cc: (See page 4) |
| -
| |
| (Closed) Violation 50-321/86-03-01 -
| |
| Failure to maintain Unit-1 secondary containment integrity. GPC letter of April 29, 1986 and NPC response of May 19, 1986, were reviewe r
| |
| '
| |
| .
| |
| .
| |
|
| |
|
| - (Closed) Violation 50-321/86-03-02 - Failure to properly implement a safety related test procedure. GPC letter of April 29, 1986 and NRC response of May 19, 1986, were reviewe (Closed) Violation 50,321,366/86-03-03 - Failure to adequately prepare two safety related procedures. GPC letter of April 29, 1986 and NRC response of May 19, 1986, were reviewe (Closed) Violation 50-321/86-12-01 - Failure to maintain shutdown cooling operational when required by TS. GPC letter of June 11, 1986 and NRC response of July 2, 1986, were reviewe (Closed) Violation 50-366/86-09-01 - Failure to return Unit-2 core spray jockey pump into servic GPC letter of May 21, 1986 and NRC response of June 3, 1986, were reviewe (Closed) Unresolved Item 50-366/86-20-03 - Unit-2 diesel generator battery rack qualification concerns. The '.nspector questioned the seismic qualification of the Unit-2 diesel generator 125 VDC batteries due to failure to have the rack spacing and mounting criteria in accordance with original design specifications. The licensee requested an engineering evaluation be conducted to determine the qualification of the batteries. An analysis conducted by an engineering firm and | | e Georgia Power Company 4 JAN 121987 cc: J. P. O'Reilly, Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations |
| - | | . T. Beckham, Vice President, Plant Hatch |
| independently by the battery vendor concluded that the seismic quali-fication of the batteries and racks was valid even though the presence of spacing gaps between the batteries and rack side-rails was in excess of that specified on design drawings. The licensee performed a modification on the battery / rack configuration to bring the design into conformance with design specifications. An engineering evaluation concluded that this modification is acceptable and seismic qualifi-cation is maintained. This item is close Operational Safety Verification (71707)
| | . C. Nix, Site Operations General |
| The inspectors kept themselves informed on a daily basis of the overall plant status and any significant safety matters related to plant operation , Daily discussions were held with plant management and various members of the plant operating staf The inspectors made frequent visits to the contrcl roo Observations included instrument readings, setpoints and recordings, status of operating systems, tags and clearances on equipment, controls and switches, annunciator alarus, adherence to limiting conditions for opera-tion, temporary alterations in effect, daily journals and data sheet entries, control room manning, and access controls. This inspection activity included numerous informal discussions with operators and their supervisors. Weekly, when on site, selected Engineering Safety Feature The confirmation was made by
| | / Manager V A). Fraser, Acting Site QA Supervisor vi.. Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Licensing bec. NRC Resident Inspector V Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary Document Control Desk-Strce of Georgia RII-GJenkins 01 / |
| ,
| | RI RII RI |
| (ESF) systems were confirmed operabl verifying the following: Accessible valve flow path aligrment, power supply
| | {- RII@ A L RC oteau:ht FJCa htrell% VLBrownlee LReyes j DWa er MErnst 12/ /86 'g /06 12/~)/86 $(/7/86 / $ /86 12/ |
| ' breaker and fuse status, instrumentation, major component leakage,
| | 1 (> 0 p/r7 / / |
| ' | |
| lubrication, cooling, and general condition.
| |
|
| |
|
| i l
| | ' NIT' K' |
| t
| |
| | |
| -
| |
| r
| |
| '
| |
| .
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| General plant tours were conducted on at least a biweekly basis. Portions of the control building, turbine building, reactor building, and outside areas were visited. Observations included safety related tagout verifica-tions, shift turnover, sampling program, housekeeping and general plant conditions, fire protection equipment, control of. activities in progress, radiation protection controls, physical security, problem identification systems, and containment isolatio In the course of the monthly activities, the Resident Inspectors included a review of the licensee's physical security program. The performance of various shifts of the security force was observed in the conduct of daily activities to include: protected and vital access controls, searching of personnel, packages and vehicles, badge issuance and retrieval, escorting of visitors, patrols and compensatory posts. Also, the inspectors verified that additional security personnel were posted in the plant, because of the Unit-2 refueling outag No violations or deviations were identifie . MaintenanceObservation(62703)
| |
| During the report period, the inspectors observed selected maintenance activitie The observations included a review of the work documents for adequacy, adherence to procedure, proper tagouts, adherence to technical specifications, radiological controls, observation of all or part of the actual work and/or retesting in progress, specified retest requirements, and adherence to the appropriate quality control On September 6,1986, an electrical relay coil,1A71B-K40, failed. This resulted in a blown fuse, which caused a Unit-1 isolation of the hydrogen and oxygen analyzers; and fission product monitor. It was found during the review of maintenance work order (MWO) 1-86-8048 that the retest requirement was to verify that the isolation signal was cleared to restore operations of the primary containment atmospheric detectors. The specific function of the replaced relay coil was to provide an isolation signal to an already closed residual heat removal (RHR) isolation check valve bypass,1E11-F122A. Also, no verification was perforred to demonstrate that replaced coil was goe The safety significance of this particular maintenance retest was minimal and did not warrant a violation by itsel Procedure 34SV-Z41-002-1, Revision 1, for the control room air intake isolation valve operability did not check the timing for the control room exhaust isolation valves (1Z41-F018A and -F0188). Based en drawing H-16042, Revision 15, these valves would close with the same high chlorine isolation signal received by the control room intake isolation valves (1Z41-F011,
| |
| -F012, and -F016). The control room isolation function test, 42SV-Z41-001-15, Revision 2, did check the closure of the control room exhaust isolation valves within 7 seconds of an isolation signal. However, Unit-1 TS 4.12.B specifically addressed only the control room intake
| |
| | |
| _
| |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| isolation valve timing requirements. The inspector reviewed maintenance performed on control room isolation valves and found that the intake isolation valves were timed, as required, after work was done. No record of any maintenance performed on the control room exhaust isolation valves was foun No violations or deviations were identifie . SurveillanceObservations(61726)
| |
| The inspectors observed the performance of selected surveillances. The observation included a review of the procedure for technical adequacy, conformance to Technical Specifications, verification of test instrument calibration, observation of all or part of the actual surveillances, removal from service and return to service of the system or components affected, and review of the data for acceptability based upon the acceptance criteri The control room filter train differential pressure test procedure, 57SV-Z41-002-1, Revision 0, did not the establish the design flow rate test condition of 2,500 cfm (* 10%) required by Unit-1 TS 4.12.A.1.a and Unit-2 TS 4.7.2.e.l. This Unit-1 procedure was applicable for Unit-2, because of the common main control room for both units. The TSs required establishing a flow rate of 2500 cfm (* 10%) and then measuring the pressure drop across the combined HEPA filters and charcoal absorber bank to verify a pressure drop of less than 6 inches of wate The inspector found that the actual flow rates established across the control room HEPA filters by procedure 57SV-Z41-002-1 had exceeded the maximum allowable value of 2,750 cfm by 15% or greater, since 1979. The inspector determined the actual volumetric flow rates based on the manometer readings measured and recorded by 57SV-Z41-002-1 in " inches of water" for each control room supply fan (1741-C012A and -C012B). The manometer pressures were then converted to flows by the inspector using the equation provided in procedure 42SV-Z41-001-IS, Revision 2, Data Package 1, Step 62. Procedure 575V-Z41-002-1, Revision 0, was found to be inadequate, because neither a differential pressure acceptance criterion nor a conversion method
| |
| ! to obtain the volumetric flow rate was stated in the procedure. Plant Hatch l Quality Assurance Manual (QAM), Section 11.2.C.2.b, and procedure 10AC-MGR-003-0S, Revision. 4, Section 8.3.2.3.12, required the establishment of such an acceptance criterio Also, the manometer installed by 57SV-241-002-1, Step F.3, was not procedurally remove The failure to establish the required surveillance flow condition across the control room HEPA filters and use of an inadequate procedure is considered a violation (50-321,366/86-28-01). . __ _ _ . - _ . _ - _ _ _ _ . . _
| |
| _ _ _ . . ._
| |
| | |
| .
| |
| '
| |
| .
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| The inspector ident1fied that procedure 57SV-Z41-002-1 was not performed within the frequendy required by Unit-1 TS 4.12.A.1.a; and Unit-2 TSs 4.7.2.e.1 and 4.0.2.b. As stated previously, procedure 57SV-Z41-002-1 was applicable for Unit-2, because of the common main control room for both unit The last four times procedure 57SV-Z41-002-1 was performed were:
| |
| September 25, 1986*; October 25, 1984; March 13, 1981; and May 8, 1979. The period of 43 months between 1981 and 1984 and of 23 months between 1984 and 1986 with no surveillance performed exceeded the 18 month surveillance frequency required by Unit-1 TS 4.12.A.1.a and Unit-2 TS 4.7.2.e.l. Also, these dates exceeded the Unit-2 TS 4.0.2.b limit of 3.25 times the 18 month surveillance interval for consecutive surveillances by 30 month Furthermore, a review of the 1986 Licensee's Event Reports (LERs) identified the following missed TS surveillances:
| |
| Date Unit # LER # TS # Topic 02-07-86 1
| |
| '
| |
| 86-004 4.9.A. "1B" Diesel Generator Battery Service Tes .3.6. Drywell Fire Detector Alarm .7. Hydraulic Shocks and Sway Arrester (Note: cited as a violation in IE Report 50-321,366/86-15).
| |
| | |
| 07-07-86 1 86-026 Table 4.1-1 Reactor Water Level Item 6 Instrumen .9.A.7. V Automatic Rus Rev. 1 Transfer Circuitr .6.1.1. Primary Containment Manual Valves.
| |
| | |
| ; In 1985, the licensee conducted a line-by-line comparison of both unit
| |
| ! procedures with the Unit-1 and Unit-2 TS surveillance requirements. The results of these reviews were documented in LERs: 50-321/85-028, 50-321/85-032, 50-366/85-28, and 50-366/85-2 Also, most recently in LER 50-366/86-016, the licensee stated:
| |
| !
| |
| *The last completion date for surveillance 57SV-Z41-002-1 was changed from December 6, 1985, as stated at the exit interview, to September 25, 1986. It I was found, after a request by the inspector to produce the supporting
| |
| ,
| |
| documentation, that the GPC surveillance coordinator's performance date of
| |
| '
| |
| December 6, 1985, was unsupported by documentatio The computer sheet used to track surveillances performed was returned initialed to the surveillance coordinator, indicating that the work was complete . ._ - .. , -
| |
| .-
| |
| | |
| _
| |
| '
| |
| .
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| "The Procedure Upgrade Program (PUP) currently implemented at Plant Hatch and previously described... ensure surveillance procedures properly address Technical Specificaticns requirements. Completion of this program should preclude recurrence of this type of event fer each procedure that implements a Technical Specification requirement. The particular procedure described in this event [345V-SUV-001-2] had not yet been through the upgrade process."
| |
| | |
| The failure to perform the control roem HEPA filter surveillances within the required TS frequencies is considered a violation (50-321,366/86-28-02). In the response to this violation, the licensee is further requested to address the missed surveillance in terms of the PUP milestones and completion date . Plant Modification Observations (37700)
| |
| The inspectors observed the performance of selected plant modification Design Change Requests (DCRs). The observation included a review of the DCR for technical adequacy, conformance to Technical Specifications, verifica-tion of test instrument calibration, observation of all or part of the actual surveillances, removal from service and return to service of the system or components affected, and review of the data for acceptability based upon the acceptance criteri It was noted by the inspector that since 1982 as-built notices (ABNs), were not incorporated into the controlled drawings, despite the effort by the licensee for timely incorporation of drawing ABNs. Specific examples were:
| |
| Drawing Drawing Number Rev. N Outstanding ABN(s)
| |
| H-17786 8 84-528 H-17787 12 83-602; 84-473; 86-162 H-17791 6 84-528 H-17792 6 84-528; 85-069 H-17801 13 87-164 H-17802 20 82-164; 84-418 H-17803 19 82-164 H-17804 11 82-164; 86-143 H-17805 7 82-164; 86-164, -282 H-17806 23 84-528; 85-611; 86-040, -162, -168, -352 H-17810 12 84-528; 86-162 H-17811 12 84-5?8; 86-162 H-17815 6 83-433; 85-526 The licensee is investigating the effectiveness of their program to incorporate drawing ABN Drawing errors surveillance found by were:
| |
| activities, the insp(ector, whileH-16276, a). Drawing reviewing maintenance Re and 16 with ABNs 85-605, Sup.3 and 86-140 did not reference drawing H-16274, Rev. 0 with ABNs 86-140 and 86-359 for the fission products menitoring system; and (b).
| |
| | |
| _
| |
| '.
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| internal motor control center wiring centers (MCCs) wiring pin numbers on H-17069 Rev. 6, were not in agreement with the pin numbers referenced in figure 1 of H-17068, Rev. No violations or deviations were identifie . ESF System Walkdown (71710)
| |
| The inspectors routinely conduct partial walkdowns of ESF systems. Valve and breaker / switch lineups and equipment conditions were randomly verified both locally and in the centrol room to verify that the lineups were in accordance with licensee requirements for operability and equipment material conditions were satisfactor The control room ventilation system, which would provide environmental habitability during a radiological accident, was walkdown by the inspecto Two violations were identified. The first violation was for an inadequate procedure that resulted in a failure to establish a surveillance volumetric flow rate required by Unit-2 TS 4.7. The second violation involved exceeding surveillance frequencies of the control room filter train required by Unit-1 and Unit-2 TSs. These violations were discussed in paragraph Also found during the walkdown were:
| |
| -
| |
| 40C 1R24-5002 actual frame numbers were different from those listed in the system lineup procedure, 34S0-241-001-1, Revision 0, Data Package 2. This procedure was in agreement with drawings: H-17068, Pevision 8; H-17069, Revision 6; and H-17073, Revision Air handling units A, B, and C (1Z41-B003A, -8003B, and -8003C) were each listed with a four position switch in 3450-241-001-1, Revision 0, Data Package 4. These switches in the control room were actually switches with three positions - off/run/ emergency run. The actual switches agreed with drawing H-17068, Revision . Reportable Occurrences (90712 & 92700)
| |
| A number of Licensee Event Reports (LERs) were reviewed for potential generic impact, to detect trends, and to determine whether corrective actions appeared appropriate. Events which were reported immediately were also reviewed as they occurred to determine that Technical Specifications were being met and the public health and safety were of utmost consideratio The following LERs are closed b sed on the TS surveillance frequency violation cited in this report, 50-321,366/86-28-02:
| |
| Unit-1: 86-002 (Rev. 1), 86-004, and 86-02 Unit-2: 86-004 and 86-01 _
| |
| . 1 O
| |
| .
| |
| | |
| 10. Unit-1 Main Steam Isolation Logic (92701)
| |
| The Unit-1 main steam isolation logic was verified to be tested from a high radiation isolation sienal to the closure of the main steam isolation valves (MSIVs), because of a' regional re The elementary diagrams for the reactor protection system (IC71-) ques and for the primary containment isolation system (IA71-) were used in this determination. Also, the associated functional tests for this logic were checked (i.e., 57SV-D11-001-1, Revision 0, and 34SV-B21-001-1, Revision 0) and found to be within the surveillance frequencie No violations or deviations were identified.
| |
| | |
| l
| |
| }} | | }} |
Similar Documents at Hatch |
|---|
Category:CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS
MONTHYEARML20217D2901999-10-13013 October 1999
Forwards SER Accepting Licensee 990305 Proposed Changes to Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant Emergency Classification Scheme to Add Emergency Action Levels Related to Operation of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
ML20217G0401999-10-0707 October 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-09 & 50-366/99-09 on 990607-11 & 0823-27.One Violation Occurred Being Treated as NCV
ML20217G2631999-10-0707 October 1999
Informs That on 990930,NRC Staff Completed mid-cycle PPR of Hatch Plant & Did Not Identify Any Areas Where Performance Warranted More than Core Insp Program.Regional Initiative Insps to Observe Const Activities Will Be Conducted
ML20216G0251999-09-24024 September 1999
Concludes That All Requested Info of GL 98-01 & Supplement 1 Provided & Licensing Action for GL 98-01 & Supplement 1 Complete for Plant
ML20216H3641999-09-20020 September 1999
Forwards NRC Form 536 in Response to AL 99-03, Preparation & Scheduling of Operator Licensing Exams
HL-5839, Forwards Three New & One Revised Relief Requests for Third 10-year Interval ISI Program for Plant,Developed to Clarify Documentation Requirements,To Propose Alternate Exam Requirements IAW ASME Code Cases N-598 & N-5731999-09-16016 September 1999
Forwards Three New & One Revised Relief Requests for Third 10-year Interval ISI Program for Plant,Developed to Clarify Documentation Requirements,To Propose Alternate Exam Requirements IAW ASME Code Cases N-598 & N-573
ML20217B5271999-09-16016 September 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-05 & 50-366/99-05 on 990711-0821.No Violations Noted
ML20212A6411999-09-13013 September 1999
Forwards Safety Evaluation of Relief Request RR-V-16 for Third Ten Year Interval Inservice Testing Program
HL-5837, Informs That Recent Evaluation of Inservice Testing Program Activities Has Resulted in Requirement for Snoc to Revise Two Existing Requests for Relief,Withdraw One Request for Relief & Revise One Existing Cold SD Justification1999-09-13013 September 1999
Informs That Recent Evaluation of Inservice Testing Program Activities Has Resulted in Requirement for Snoc to Revise Two Existing Requests for Relief,Withdraw One Request for Relief & Revise One Existing Cold SD Justification
HL-5832, Submits Comments Concerning Reactor Vessel Integrity Database (Rvid),Version 2 for Plant Hatch,Per NRC1999-09-0101 September 1999
Submits Comments Concerning Reactor Vessel Integrity Database (Rvid),Version 2 for Plant Hatch,Per NRC
ML20211Q4801999-09-0101 September 1999
Informs That on 990812-13,Region II Hosted Training Managers Conference on Recent Changes to Operator Licensing Program. List of Attendees,Copy of Slide Presentations & List of Questions Received from Participants Encl
HL-5825, Forwards Response to Informal NRC RAI Re Proposed Emergency Actions Levels Associated with Independent Spent Fuel Storage Operations1999-08-20020 August 1999
Forwards Response to Informal NRC RAI Re Proposed Emergency Actions Levels Associated with Independent Spent Fuel Storage Operations
HL-5827, Forwards Fitness for Duty Performance Data for six-month Reporting period,Jan-June 1999,as Required by 10CFR26.71(d)1999-08-19019 August 1999
Forwards Fitness for Duty Performance Data for six-month Reporting period,Jan-June 1999,as Required by 10CFR26.71(d)
HL-5788, Forwards Owner Activity Repts,Form OAR-1 for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant for First Period of Third 10-yr Interval ISI Program.Repts Are for Unit 2 Refueling Outages 13 & 141999-08-19019 August 1999
Forwards Owner Activity Repts,Form OAR-1 for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant for First Period of Third 10-yr Interval ISI Program.Repts Are for Unit 2 Refueling Outages 13 & 14
HL-5824, Requests Exemption from Expedited Implementation Requirements of Paragraph 10CFR50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(B) as Applicable to Containment General Visual Exams of Subsection Iwe,Table IWE-2500-1,Category E-A,Item E1.111999-08-18018 August 1999
Requests Exemption from Expedited Implementation Requirements of Paragraph 10CFR50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(B) as Applicable to Containment General Visual Exams of Subsection Iwe,Table IWE-2500-1,Category E-A,Item E1.11
ML20210T6421999-08-17017 August 1999
Discusses Licensee 950814 Initial Response to GL 92-01, Rev 1,Supp 1, Rv Structural Integrity (Rvid), Issued on 950519 to Plant.Staff Revised Info in Rvid & Being Released as Rvid Version 2
ML20210V3311999-08-13013 August 1999
Provides Synposis of NRC OI Report Re Alleged Untruthful Statements Made to NRC Re Release of Contaminated Matl to Onsite Landfill.Oi Unable to Conclude That Untruthful state- Ments Were Provided to NRC
ML20210Q4821999-08-0505 August 1999
Informs That NRC Plans to Administer Gfes of Written Operator Licensing Exam on 991006.Authorized Representative of Facility Must Submit Ltr,As Listed,Identifying Individual to Take Exam,Thirty Days Before Exam Date
ML20210L7581999-08-0404 August 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-04 & 50-366/99-04 on 990530-0710.One Violation of NRC Requirements Occurred & Being Treated as Ncv,Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy
ML20210J9501999-08-0202 August 1999
Forwards SER Finding Licensee Established Acceptable Program to Verify Periodically design-basis Capability of safety-related MOVs at Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant,Units 1 & 2
ML20210J9021999-08-0202 August 1999
Forwards SER Finding Licensee Adequately Addressed Actions Requested in GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Binding of Safety-Related Power-Operated Gate Valves, for Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant,Units 1 & 2
HL-5814, Forwards New Relief Requests for Third 10-year Interval Inservice Insp Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.New Relief Requests Were Developed to Propose Alternate Insps & to Allow Use of ASME Code Cases N-605,N-508-1,N-323-1 & N-5281999-07-30030 July 1999
Forwards New Relief Requests for Third 10-year Interval Inservice Insp Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.New Relief Requests Were Developed to Propose Alternate Insps & to Allow Use of ASME Code Cases N-605,N-508-1,N-323-1 & N-528
05000366/LER-1999-007, Forwards LER 99-007-00 Re Personnel Error & Inadequate Corrective Action Causing Automatic Reactor Shutdown1999-07-27027 July 1999
Forwards LER 99-007-00 Re Personnel Error & Inadequate Corrective Action Causing Automatic Reactor Shutdown
ML20210E1601999-07-20020 July 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-10 & 50-366/99-10 on 990616-25.One Violation Noted Being Treated as Ncv.Team Identified Lack of Procedural Guidance for Identification & Trending of Repetitive Instrument Drift & Calibr Problems
HL-5810, Forwards Rev 17B to Ei Hatch FSAR & Rev 14B to Fire Hazards Analysis & Fire Protection Program, for Plant.Encls Reflect Changes Made Since Previous Submittal.With Instructions1999-07-15015 July 1999
Forwards Rev 17B to Ei Hatch FSAR & Rev 14B to Fire Hazards Analysis & Fire Protection Program, for Plant.Encls Reflect Changes Made Since Previous Submittal.With Instructions
HL-5808, Forwards Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant,Unit 1 Extended Power Uprate Startup Test Rept for Cycle 19. Rept Summarizes Startup Testing Performed on Unit 1 Following Implementation of Extended Uprate During Eighteenth Refueling Outage1999-07-15015 July 1999
Forwards Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant,Unit 1 Extended Power Uprate Startup Test Rept for Cycle 19. Rept Summarizes Startup Testing Performed on Unit 1 Following Implementation of Extended Uprate During Eighteenth Refueling Outage
HL-5807, Estimates That Seventeen (17) Submittals Will Be Made During Fy 2000 & Two (2) Submittals Will Be Made During Fy 2001,in Response to Administative Ltr 99-02, Operating Reactor Licensing Action Estimates1999-07-14014 July 1999
Estimates That Seventeen (17) Submittals Will Be Made During Fy 2000 & Two (2) Submittals Will Be Made During Fy 2001,in Response to Administative Ltr 99-02, Operating Reactor Licensing Action Estimates
ML20210J1091999-07-10010 July 1999
Submits Suggestions & Concerns Re Y2K & Nuclear Power Plants
HL-5804, Informs NRC That on or After 991018,SNOC Plans to Begin Storing Spent Fuel in Ei Hatch ISFSI IAW General License Issued,Per 10CFR72.2101999-07-0909 July 1999
Informs NRC That on or After 991018,SNOC Plans to Begin Storing Spent Fuel in Ei Hatch ISFSI IAW General License Issued,Per 10CFR72.210
HL-5796, Forwards Response to NRC 990331 Request for Supplemental Info Re SNC Earlier GL 95-07 Responses.Gl 95-07 Evaluation Sheets for Units 1 & 2 RHR Torus Spray Isolation Valves Are Encl1999-07-0909 July 1999
Forwards Response to NRC 990331 Request for Supplemental Info Re SNC Earlier GL 95-07 Responses.Gl 95-07 Evaluation Sheets for Units 1 & 2 RHR Torus Spray Isolation Valves Are Encl
HL-5801, Forwards New Relief Requests for Third 10-Yr Interval ISI Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.New Relief Requests RR-25 & RR-26 Were Developed to Propose Alternate Repair Techniques IAW ASME Code N-562 & N-561,respectively1999-07-0909 July 1999
Forwards New Relief Requests for Third 10-Yr Interval ISI Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.New Relief Requests RR-25 & RR-26 Were Developed to Propose Alternate Repair Techniques IAW ASME Code N-562 & N-561,respectively
ML20209E4801999-06-30030 June 1999
Confirms 990630 Telcon Between M Crosby & DC Payne Re Arrangements Made for Administration of Licensing Exam at Plant During Weeks of 991018-1101
ML20196H8811999-06-25025 June 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-03 & 50-366/99-03 on 990418- 0529.No Violations Occurred.Conduct of Activities at Plant Generally Characterized by safety-conscious Operations & Sound Engineering & Maint Practices
HL-5790, Responds to NRC RAI Re GL 98-01, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Nuclear Power Plants1999-06-21021 June 1999
Responds to NRC RAI Re GL 98-01, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Nuclear Power Plants
ML20212J0541999-06-17017 June 1999
Responds to Requesting That NRC Staff ...Allow BWR Plants Identified to Defer Weld Overlay Exams Until March 2001 or Until Completion of NRC Staff Review & Approval of Proposed Generic Rept,Whichever Comes First
ML20207E7561999-06-0303 June 1999
Informs of Completion of Review & Evaluation of Info Provided by Southern Nuclear Operating Co by Ltr Dtd 980608, Proposing Changes to Third 10-Yr Interval ISI Program Plan Requests for Relief RR-4 & R-6.Requests Acceptable
HL-5763, Informs That Util Is Changing Responsibility for Periodic Concerns Program Review,Per Insp Repts 50-321/95-12 & 50-366/95-12.Reviews Will Now Be Performed Under Direction of Vice President & Corporate Counsel1999-05-20020 May 1999
Informs That Util Is Changing Responsibility for Periodic Concerns Program Review,Per Insp Repts 50-321/95-12 & 50-366/95-12.Reviews Will Now Be Performed Under Direction of Vice President & Corporate Counsel
HL-5785, Forwards New Relief Requests RR-V-16 for Third 10-yr Interval Inservice Testing Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.Relief Request Was Developed to Propose Alternate Schedule for Replacement of HPCI Rupture Disks1999-05-18018 May 1999
Forwards New Relief Requests RR-V-16 for Third 10-yr Interval Inservice Testing Program for Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant.Relief Request Was Developed to Propose Alternate Schedule for Replacement of HPCI Rupture Disks
ML20206Q0751999-05-0606 May 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-02 & 50-366/99-02 on 990307-0417.No Violations Noted
ML20206G1611999-05-0404 May 1999
Forwards SER Approving Util 990316 Revised Relief Request RR-P-14,for Inservice Testing Program for Pumps & Valves Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(ii)
ML20206P6921999-04-27027 April 1999
Discusses 990422 Public Meeting at Hatch Facility Re Results of Periodic Plant Performance Review for Hatch Nuclear Facility for Period of Feb 1997 to Jan 1999.List of Attendees & Copy of Handouts Used by Hatch,Encl
HL-5777, Notifies NRC That Exam Coverage for One Weld Exceeded Criteria for Plant.Reasons for Exam Coverage Being Less than Initially Estimated as Listed1999-04-26026 April 1999
Notifies NRC That Exam Coverage for One Weld Exceeded Criteria for Plant.Reasons for Exam Coverage Being Less than Initially Estimated as Listed
HL-5758, Forwards Response to NRC 990129 RAI Re GL 96-05 Program at Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant1999-04-0909 April 1999
Forwards Response to NRC 990129 RAI Re GL 96-05 Program at Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant
ML20205T1831999-04-0909 April 1999
Informs That on 990316,S Grantham & Ho Christensen Confirmed Initial Operator Licensing Exam Schedule for Ei Hatch NPP for FY00.Initial Exam Dates Are 991001 & 2201 for Approx 12 Candidates.Chief Examiner Will Be C Payne
ML20205M3181999-04-0707 April 1999
Confirms Telcon Between D Crowe & Ph Skinner Re Mgt Meeting Scheduled for 990422 in Conference Room of Maint Training Bldg.Purpose of Meeting to Discuss Results of Periodic PPR for Plant for Period of Feb 1997 - Jan 1999
ML20205M3011999-04-0202 April 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-01 & 50-366/99-01 on 990124-0306.Non-cited Violation Identified
HL-5761, Forwards Revised Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant Psp,Effective 990331,per 10CFR50.54(p)(2).Justification & Detailed Instructions Encl.Plan Withheld,Per 10CFR73.211999-03-31031 March 1999
Forwards Revised Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant Psp,Effective 990331,per 10CFR50.54(p)(2).Justification & Detailed Instructions Encl.Plan Withheld,Per 10CFR73.21
HL-5750, Forwards Status of Decommissining Funding,Per Requirements 10CFR50.75(f)(1),on Behalf of Licensed Owners of Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant1999-03-30030 March 1999
Forwards Status of Decommissining Funding,Per Requirements 10CFR50.75(f)(1),on Behalf of Licensed Owners of Ei Hatch Nuclear Plant
ML20205H1491999-03-25025 March 1999
Forwards Info for OLs DPR-7 & NPF-5 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors,Per 10CFR50.75(f)(1).Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia Is One of Licensed Owners of Ei Hatch,Owning 17.7% of Facility
ML20205D3211999-03-24024 March 1999
Informs That Safety Sys Engineering Insp Previously Scheduled for 990405-09 & 19-23,rescheduled for 990607-11 & 21-25
1999-09-24
[Table view]
Category:NRC TO UTILITY
MONTHYEARML20062G6171990-11-19019 November 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-22 & 50-366/90-22 on 901015- 19.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20062F8171990-11-14014 November 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-20 & 50-366/90-20 on 900915- 1020 & Notice of Violation
ML20058H8421990-11-13013 November 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-21 & 50-366/90-21 on 901001- 05.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20217A2921990-11-13013 November 1990
Advises That Kn Jabbour Assigned as Project Manager for Plant
ML20217A7441990-11-0707 November 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-16 & 50-366/90-16 on 901001-12.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20058E8491990-10-23023 October 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-19 & 50-366/90-19 on 900925-28.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20062B2461990-10-12012 October 1990
Requests That Analyses of Liquid Samples Spiked W/ Radionuclides Be Completed as Soon as Practicable,But No Later than 60 Days from Receipt of Samples.Results Should Be Sent to DM Collins at Listed Address
ML20059J9151990-09-0707 September 1990
Forwards Guidance for Reporting of Events Under Requirements of 10CFR50.73.W/o Encl
ML20058M3561990-08-0808 August 1990
Discusses Util Response to Generic Ltr 89-10, Safety- Related Motor-Operated Valve (MOV) Testing & Surveillance. Recommends That Licensees Test MOVs in Situ Under Design Basis Conditions
ML20058L5031990-08-0303 August 1990
Advises That 900727 Response to Generic Ltr 88-14 Re Instrument Air Supply Sys Problems Affecting safety-related Equipment,Acceptable
ML20055H3581990-07-23023 July 1990
Advises That Util Provided Acceptable Resolution to NRC Bulletin 89-001, Failure of Westinghouse Steam Generator Tube Mechanical Plugs
ML20055H6451990-07-13013 July 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-14 & 50-366/90-14 on 900512-0622.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20055E8841990-07-10010 July 1990
Advises That EAS-28-0589, Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant Basis for Use of Homogeneous Equilibrium Model for Environ Qualification & Radiological Release Evaluation, Withheld from Public Disclosure (Ref 10CFR2.790),per 900628 Request
ML20055H3451990-06-21021 June 1990
Responds to Re Basis for Employment Action Involving Former Util Employee Reporting Safety Concerns. Concurs W/Request to Defer Further Discussion Until Completion of Dept of Labor Process
ML20059M9561990-06-13013 June 1990
Forwards NRC Performance Indicators for First Quarter 1990. W/O Encl
ML20055D0021990-06-11011 June 1990
Discusses Util 900514 Application for Amend to License NPF-47,increasing Suppression Pool Temp from 95 F to 100 F. Requests That Util Demonstrate Applicability of Items Addressed in Encl Hatch Safety Evaluation to Facility
ML20055C5131990-05-17017 May 1990
Authorizes Restart of Facility When Identified Flaws in Welds Repaired W/Overlay Designs,Per Util & Generic Ltr 88-01.Full Rept of outage-related Insp Activities Should Be Submitted Following Restart
ML20055C4771990-05-11011 May 1990
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/90-13 & 50-366/90-13 on 900430-0504.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20248D1821989-09-20020 September 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-16 & 50-366/89-16 on 890722- 0825.Violations Noted But Not Cited Since All Criteria of licensee-identified Violations Met
ML20248G9731989-09-20020 September 1989
Forwards Unexecuted Amend 13 to Indemnity Agreement B-69, Reflecting Increase in Primary Layer of Nuclear Energy Liability Insurance Provided by ANI & Maelu
ML20247C9281989-09-0606 September 1989
Forwards Exam Rept 50-321/OL-89-01 Administered on 890612-16.Concerns Raised Re pre-exam Review Ineffective in Ensuring site-specific Exam Validity & Operator Generic Weaknesses
ML20247B3931989-09-0505 September 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-17 & 50-366/89-17 on 890612-16 & 0731-0804.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20247B5381989-09-0101 September 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-18 & 50-366/89-18 on 890807-11.Violation Noted But Not Cited,Based on Meeting Criteria of licensee-identified Violations
ML20246E6861989-08-24024 August 1989
Advises That 890807 Rev to Guard Training & Qualification Plan Consistent W/Provisions of 10CFR50.54(p) & Acceptable for Inclusion Into Plan
ML20246M8791989-08-23023 August 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-13 & 50-366/89-13 on 890710-13.Violations Noted
ML20246P4921989-08-22022 August 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-15 & 50-366/89-15 on 890724-28.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20246N8001989-08-18018 August 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-08 & 50-366/89-08 on 890515-19,0605-09 & 19 & Notice of Violation.Concern Raised Re Implementation of Inservice Testing of Pumps & Valves on Emergency Diesel Generator Sys
ML20246C9721989-08-16016 August 1989
Advises That Apr 1989 Rev 9 to Emergency Plan Meets Planning Stds of 10CFR50.47(b) & Requirements of 10CFR50,App E
ML20246A6621989-08-0808 August 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-14 & 50-366/89-14 on 890717-20.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20248C9041989-08-0202 August 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-12 & 50-366/89-12 on 890624-0721.Violations Noted.Violation Not Being Cited Due to Licensee Meeting All of Criteria for Categorization of licensee-identified Violations
ML20248A2941989-08-0101 August 1989
Discusses Util Compliance W/Atws Rule (10CFR50.62).Design Change to Utilize Test Switches to Block Actuation Signal to Alternate Rod Injection Solenoid Valve During Testing Acceptable
ML20247N7801989-07-27027 July 1989
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-321/88-37 & 50-366/88-37.Violation Occurred as Stated in Notice of Violation.Assessment Withheld (Ref 10CFR73.21)
ML20247E6181989-07-24024 July 1989
Informs of Agreement Reached During 890719 Telcon Re IGSCC Exam for Fall 1989 Refueling/Maint Outage & Matter of Calibr Blocks to Be Used for Ultrasonic Insp Activities During Outage
ML20247E4251989-07-19019 July 1989
Requests Listed Items for Reactor Operator & Senior Operator Licensing Exams Scheduled for Wk of 891009.All Reactor Operator & Senior Reactor Operator License Application Info Should Be Submitted at Least 30 Days Before First Exam Date
ML20247B0761989-07-19019 July 1989
Ack Receipt of Util Withdrawing 880711 Request for Relief from ASME Code Section XI Requirement for Testing Class 2 Portions of Main Steam Lines of Units at 1.25 Times Design Pressure.Code Case N-479 Acceptable for Use at Plant
IR 05000321/19890021989-07-17017 July 1989
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-321/89-02 & 50-366/89-02
ML20247E3651989-07-17017 July 1989
Requests Listed Items for Requalification Program Evaluation Scheduled for Wks of 890911 & 25.NRC to Administer Operating & Written Exams & Discuss W/Qualified Personnel & Operators Schedule for Processing Exams.Ref Matl Requirements Encl
ML20246Q2511989-07-14014 July 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-11 & 50-366/89-11 on 890619-23.Noted Violations Not Being Cited Due to Criteria for Categorization of Licensee Identified Violations Being Met
ML20247P5571989-07-13013 July 1989
Documents Info Received During Discussions Between Region II Personnel & Concerned Individual.Encl Withheld (Ref 10CFR2.790(a))
ML20246F6661989-07-0606 July 1989
Affirms Validity of Staff Reaction to Final Rept,Submitted in Util Re Bent Rockbolts Observed in Torus Anchorage.Bent Rockbolts Appear to Pose No Safety Impediment to Restart.Issue Closed
ML20246K7441989-07-0505 July 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-10 & 50-366/89-10 on 890527- 0623.Details Re Licensee non-cited Violations Described in Rept
ML20246B6351989-06-30030 June 1989
Forwards NRR Ack Receipt of Petition Filed by Ecology Ctr of Southern California,For Info.Ltr States That Petition Being Treated Under 10CFR2.206 of Commission Regulation
ML20245K9301989-06-23023 June 1989
Advises That Apr 1989 Rev to Physical Security Plan Transmitted by Consistent W/Provisions of 10CFR50.54(p) & Acceptable
ML20245J9641989-06-22022 June 1989
Advises That Util 880224 Rev 2 to Inservice Insp Program for Second 10-yr Interval Acceptable Except as Noted in Encls
ML20245H7291989-06-19019 June 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-07 & 50-366/89-07 on 890422-0526.Licensee Identified Violations Not Cited
ML20245D4541989-06-15015 June 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-02 & 50-366/89-02 on 890227-0317 & Notice of Violation
ML20245A9991989-06-14014 June 1989
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/89-09 & 50-366/89-09 on 890522-26.No Violations or Deviations Noted
ML20248C1331989-06-0606 June 1989
Forwards Director'S Decision 89-03,transmittal Ltr & Fr Notice Denying Ocre Petition Filed Under 10CFR2.206 for Commission Take Action Applicable to All Bwrs,Per 890309 Power Oscillation Event at LaSalle Unit 2
ML20244D1581989-06-0505 June 1989
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-321/89-06 & 50-366/89-06
1990-09-07
[Table view]
Category:OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
MONTHYEARML20217D2901999-10-13013 October 1999
Forwards SER Accepting Licensee 990305 Proposed Changes to Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant Emergency Classification Scheme to Add Emergency Action Levels Related to Operation of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
ML20217G0401999-10-0707 October 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-09 & 50-366/99-09 on 990607-11 & 0823-27.One Violation Occurred Being Treated as NCV
ML20217G2631999-10-0707 October 1999
Informs That on 990930,NRC Staff Completed mid-cycle PPR of Hatch Plant & Did Not Identify Any Areas Where Performance Warranted More than Core Insp Program.Regional Initiative Insps to Observe Const Activities Will Be Conducted
ML20216G0251999-09-24024 September 1999
Concludes That All Requested Info of GL 98-01 & Supplement 1 Provided & Licensing Action for GL 98-01 & Supplement 1 Complete for Plant
ML20217B5271999-09-16016 September 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-05 & 50-366/99-05 on 990711-0821.No Violations Noted
ML20212A6411999-09-13013 September 1999
Forwards Safety Evaluation of Relief Request RR-V-16 for Third Ten Year Interval Inservice Testing Program
ML20211Q4801999-09-0101 September 1999
Informs That on 990812-13,Region II Hosted Training Managers Conference on Recent Changes to Operator Licensing Program. List of Attendees,Copy of Slide Presentations & List of Questions Received from Participants Encl
ML20210T6421999-08-17017 August 1999
Discusses Licensee 950814 Initial Response to GL 92-01, Rev 1,Supp 1, Rv Structural Integrity (Rvid), Issued on 950519 to Plant.Staff Revised Info in Rvid & Being Released as Rvid Version 2
ML20210V3311999-08-13013 August 1999
Provides Synposis of NRC OI Report Re Alleged Untruthful Statements Made to NRC Re Release of Contaminated Matl to Onsite Landfill.Oi Unable to Conclude That Untruthful state- Ments Were Provided to NRC
ML20210Q4821999-08-0505 August 1999
Informs That NRC Plans to Administer Gfes of Written Operator Licensing Exam on 991006.Authorized Representative of Facility Must Submit Ltr,As Listed,Identifying Individual to Take Exam,Thirty Days Before Exam Date
ML20210L7581999-08-0404 August 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-04 & 50-366/99-04 on 990530-0710.One Violation of NRC Requirements Occurred & Being Treated as Ncv,Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy
ML20210J9021999-08-0202 August 1999
Forwards SER Finding Licensee Adequately Addressed Actions Requested in GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Binding of Safety-Related Power-Operated Gate Valves, for Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant,Units 1 & 2
ML20210J9501999-08-0202 August 1999
Forwards SER Finding Licensee Established Acceptable Program to Verify Periodically design-basis Capability of safety-related MOVs at Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant,Units 1 & 2
ML20210E1601999-07-20020 July 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-10 & 50-366/99-10 on 990616-25.One Violation Noted Being Treated as Ncv.Team Identified Lack of Procedural Guidance for Identification & Trending of Repetitive Instrument Drift & Calibr Problems
ML20209E4801999-06-30030 June 1999
Confirms 990630 Telcon Between M Crosby & DC Payne Re Arrangements Made for Administration of Licensing Exam at Plant During Weeks of 991018-1101
ML20196H8811999-06-25025 June 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-03 & 50-366/99-03 on 990418- 0529.No Violations Occurred.Conduct of Activities at Plant Generally Characterized by safety-conscious Operations & Sound Engineering & Maint Practices
ML20212J0541999-06-17017 June 1999
Responds to Requesting That NRC Staff ...Allow BWR Plants Identified to Defer Weld Overlay Exams Until March 2001 or Until Completion of NRC Staff Review & Approval of Proposed Generic Rept,Whichever Comes First
ML20207E7561999-06-0303 June 1999
Informs of Completion of Review & Evaluation of Info Provided by Southern Nuclear Operating Co by Ltr Dtd 980608, Proposing Changes to Third 10-Yr Interval ISI Program Plan Requests for Relief RR-4 & R-6.Requests Acceptable
ML20206Q0751999-05-0606 May 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-02 & 50-366/99-02 on 990307-0417.No Violations Noted
ML20206G1611999-05-0404 May 1999
Forwards SER Approving Util 990316 Revised Relief Request RR-P-14,for Inservice Testing Program for Pumps & Valves Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(ii)
ML20206P6921999-04-27027 April 1999
Discusses 990422 Public Meeting at Hatch Facility Re Results of Periodic Plant Performance Review for Hatch Nuclear Facility for Period of Feb 1997 to Jan 1999.List of Attendees & Copy of Handouts Used by Hatch,Encl
ML20205T1831999-04-0909 April 1999
Informs That on 990316,S Grantham & Ho Christensen Confirmed Initial Operator Licensing Exam Schedule for Ei Hatch NPP for FY00.Initial Exam Dates Are 991001 & 2201 for Approx 12 Candidates.Chief Examiner Will Be C Payne
ML20205M3181999-04-0707 April 1999
Confirms Telcon Between D Crowe & Ph Skinner Re Mgt Meeting Scheduled for 990422 in Conference Room of Maint Training Bldg.Purpose of Meeting to Discuss Results of Periodic PPR for Plant for Period of Feb 1997 - Jan 1999
ML20205M3011999-04-0202 April 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/99-01 & 50-366/99-01 on 990124-0306.Non-cited Violation Identified
ML20205D3211999-03-24024 March 1999
Informs That Safety Sys Engineering Insp Previously Scheduled for 990405-09 & 19-23,rescheduled for 990607-11 & 21-25
ML20205A2991999-03-19019 March 1999
Advises of NRC Planned Insp Effort Resulting from Hatch PPR on 990202.PPR Involved Participation of All Technical Divs in Evaluating Insp Results & Safety Performance Info for Period of Feb 1997 - Jan 1999.Insp Plan for Future Encl
ML20207M1771999-03-11011 March 1999
Forwards SE Accepting Relief Request for Authorization of Alternative Reactor Pressure Vessel Exam for Circumferential Welds
ML20204E6601999-03-11011 March 1999
Discusses Ofc of Investigation Rept 2-1998-024 Re Contract Worker Terminated by General Technical Svc Supervisor for Engaging in Protected Activity.Evidence Did Not Substantiate Allegation & No Further Action Planned
ML20207D3131999-02-24024 February 1999
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/98-09 & 50-366/98-09 on 981213- 990123.No Violations Noted.Conduct of Activities at Hatch Facility Generally Characterized by safety-conscious Operation,Sound Engineering & Maintenance
ML20203G4161999-02-17017 February 1999
Discusses Completion of Licensing Action for Bulletin 96-003, Potential Plugging of Emergency Core Cooling Suction Strainers by Debris in Bwrs
ML20203G3481999-02-0505 February 1999
Informs That NRC Plans to Administer Generic Fundamentals Exam Section of Written Operator Licensing Exam on 990407. Representative of Facility Must Submit Either Ltr Indicating No Candidates or Ltr Listing Names of Candidates for Exam
ML20199H8941999-01-21021 January 1999
Discusses Responses to GL 96-06, Assurance of Equipment Operability & Containment Integrity During Design Basis Accident Controls, for Plant,Units 1 & 2
ML20199H8761999-01-21021 January 1999
Informs That Proposed GL 88-01 Examinations of Spring 1999 Refueling Outage of Plant,Unit 1 Acceptable
ML20199K1381999-01-12012 January 1999
Informs That on 990117,Region II Implemented Staff Reorganization as Part of agency-wide Streamlining Effort, Due to Staffing Reductions in FY99 Budget.Organization Charts Encl
ML20199F1331998-12-29029 December 1998
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/98-07 & 50-366/98-07 on 981101- 1212.No Violations Identified.Activities at Hatch Facility Generally Characterized by safety-conscious Operations, Sound Engineering & Maintenance Practices
ML20199E7411998-12-23023 December 1998
Refers to 981105 Training Managers Conference Conducted at RB Russell Bldg with Representatives from All Utils.Agenda Used for Conference & List of Attendees Encl.Goal of Providing Open Forum of Operator Licensing Issues Was Met
ML20196J4771998-12-0707 December 1998
Refers to 980311 Submittal of Four New Relief Requests & One Revised Relief Request for IST Program for Pumps & Valves Ei Hatch Npp.Se Accepting Proposed Alternatives Encl
ML20196J2581998-12-0101 December 1998
Confirms Arrangements Made Between J Bailey & B Holbrook, Re Info Meeting Scheduled for 990210 to Discuss Licensee Performance,New Initiatives & Other Regulatory Issues Pertaining to Listed Facilities
ML20196J2851998-12-0101 December 1998
Advises of Planned Insp Effort Resulting from 981102 Insp Planning Meeting.Details of Insp Plan for Next 4 Months & Historial Listing of Plant Issues Called Plant Issues Matrix, Encl
ML20196F1661998-11-24024 November 1998
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/98-06 & 50-366/98-06 on 980920-1031.Insp Rept Identifes Activities That Violate NRC Requirements But Not Subject to Enforcement Actions
ML20195D7961998-11-16016 November 1998
Informs That Licensee 980114 Request for Exemption from Requirements of General Design Criterion 56 for Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant,Unit 2 Found Acceptable & No Exemption from GDC-56 Required
ML20196C8001998-11-12012 November 1998
Forwards Copy of Forms a & B,Individual Answer Sheets & Exam Results Summary of GFE Section of Written Operator Licensing Exam,Administered on 981007 by Nrc.Without Encl
ML20195B7891998-11-0909 November 1998
Discusses Completion of Licensing Action for GL 97-04, Assurance of Sufficient Net Positive Suction Head for ECC & Containment Hrps, for Plant,Unit 1
ML20155H4181998-11-0303 November 1998
Advises That Info Contained in 980918 Application & 980813 Affidavit, GE14 Lua Fuel Bundle Description Rept, Will Be Withheld from Public Disclosure,Per 10CFR2.790
ML20155B6061998-10-28028 October 1998
Forwards Safety Evaluation of TR SNCH-9501, BWR Steady State & Transient Analysis Methods Benchmarking Tp
ML20155A5461998-10-21021 October 1998
Forwards FEMA Final Rept on Exercise of Offsite Radiological Emergency Response Plans for Hatch Plant,Conducted on 980520.No Deficiencies or Areas Requiring Corrective Actions Identified During Exercise
ML20155B2461998-10-15015 October 1998
Forwards Insp Repts 50-321/98-05 & 50-366/98-05.No Violations Noted
ML20155A6261998-10-15015 October 1998
Informs That NRC Recently Obtained Info Re Industrial Safety Issues at Hatch Facility.Info Indicated That Personnel Unnecessarily Working on Energized Electrical Equipment Without Appropriate Clothing
ML20154L4491998-10-14014 October 1998
Informs That NRC Reconsidered Relocation of PCP to PCP Manual Against Guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.143 & Believe That Locating of PCP in PCP Manual,Acceptable
ML20155B0371998-10-0909 October 1998
Extends Invitation to Attend Training Manager Conference to Be Held in Atlanta,Ga on 981105.Conference Designed to Inform Regional Training & Operations Mgt of Issues & Policies That Affect Licensing of Reactor Plant Operators
1999-09-24
[Table view] |
Inspection Report - Hatch - 1986028 |
|---|
|
|
Text
( & U
..
C JAN 121987 Georgia /owerCompany ATTN: VMr. J. H. Miller, J President P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-321/86-28, 50-321/86-33, 50-366/86-28, AND 50-366/86-33 Thank you for your response of December 12, 1986, to our Notice of Violation issued on November 7, 1986, concerning activities conducted at your Hatch facility under NRC License Nos. OPR-57 and NPF-5. We are ualuating your response and would like more information concerning activities at Hatc In your response to Violations A and B, you state that the events "had no actual or potential safety consequences." We believe your position is not correct since the violations do involve potential safety consequences. The Unit I and Unit 2 Technical Specifications (TS) basis states that the TS requirements in this area ersure "the calculated doses would be less than the allowable levels stated in Criterion 19 of the General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50." Criterion 19 requires that a control room shall be provided from which actions can be taken to maintain the reactor in a safe condition under accident conditions and adequate radiation protection shall be provided to permit . access and occupancy of the control room under accident conditions. Failing to verify the operability of the main control room ventilation system in accordance with the TS as described in Violations A and B does involve potential safety consequences since actions to mitigate the effects of an accident may be impaired due to a lack of control room habitabilit Violation A Response In your response to Violation A, you imply the system was found to be satisfactory when the surveillance test was performed on September 26, 1986. We believe the actual as-found system flow was out of specification and had to be adjusted to be within the TS limit Also in your response to Violation A, you do not address the basic problem of not providing adequate detail in your procedure to ensure compliance with TS requirements. This problem was also evident in the Unit 1 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) day tank (volume) conversion problem discussed in Inspection Report 86-3 Inspection Report 86-33 requested that you discuss the cause and corrective actions relating to the Unit 1 EDG day tank (volume) conversion problem. Your response addressed the immediate corrective actions but did not provide any explanations as to the cause of the problem. The corrective actions did not 8702100285 870112 PDR ADOCK 05000321 G PDR g Il l
IEoj
, u Georgia Power Company 2 JAN 12 B87 address the more basic problem of inadequate procedures and failure to follow procedures. For example, how has this procedure been performed in the past since personnel could not verify the day tank level using the guage, and what actions will be taken to minimize these types of procedural deficiencies in other instructions?
Violation B Response In your response to Violation B, you state that personnel error contributed to the violation and surveillance "due dates" were incorrectly assigned based upon the operating cycle completion date. We would like more detail on the nature of the personnel error and on any procedures you may have to provide guidance in scheduling surveillances which were in existence at that time or are in place at this tim You stated that I&C personnel documented satisfactory performance of the surveillance test on December 6, 1985. At the time of the inspection, this documentation was not available. The resident inspectors will verify the documentation you state exists in the follow-up of this violatio Also in your response to Violation B, you discuss how frequency " changes" are independently verified since the strengthening of the program in May 1985. You also state that since the surveillance test in question has been performed within the required frequency since the changes in 1985, these previous changes will preclude this occurrence. It is not clear to us that the missed surveillances addressed in Violation B occurred due to frequency " changes." In your description of the reason for Violation B, you assign personnel error and Unit 1/ Unit 2 TS differences, but no mention is made of problems due to frequency changes. It does not appear that the changes made in May 1985 constituted corrective steps for Violation Also under corrective steps taken, you state you now schedule surveillance due dates based upon the previous "due" date of the surveillance and not " solely" upon the operating cycle completion date. This implies that you still use the operating cycle completion dates in some way to arrive at the surveillance due dates and we would like more information on how the due date is scheduled. Also, it appears that scheduling a surveillance due date based on the previous due date may lead to further violations of the specified frequencies. If a surveillance test is performed earlier than the due date and the next test is scheduled based on the due date instead of the actual performance date, then the required frequency will be exceeded if the 125 percent allowable interval is used. It appears that it would be more appropriate to schedule the next surveillance test based on the actual performance dat Under corrective steps which will be taken to prevent recurrence, you state "No further corrective steps are necessary beyond the performance of the procedure at its next due date in order to be in compliance with the 3.25 times 18-month surveillance interval." This addresses the next surveillance but does not ensure future tests will be scheduled within the TS required 3.25 times the specified interval for this or other surveillance test In summary, we would like additional information in the following area . What is the justification for considering the violations to have no potential safety consequences?
I
. 0 Georgia Power Company 3 JAN 121987 Was the as-found flowrate on September 26, 1986, outside the TS required flowrate? Will your Procedure Upgrade Program (PUP) or other programs ensure that procedures can be performed to meet TS requirements and contain adequate detail to prevent occurrences like Violation A and the EDG day tank level problem? What was the cause of the EDG day tank level problem (i.e., had the gauge been replaced recently, procedure changed, etc.)? 1 How has this procedure been performed in the past, since personnel could not verify the day tank level using the gauge? Have there been and are there any procedures which provide guidance in scheduling surveillances? What are the details of personnel error involved with Violation A? { How does the May 1985 change to the Technical Specification surveillance scheduling program revision process constitute a corrective step for Violation B (i.e., was this violation due to a frequency change)? Are surveillance due dates scheduled using operating cycle completion dates?
If so, what means are in place for not exceeding the TS required frequency?
10. .How will you prevent exceeding the TS required frequency using previous due dates vice actual completion dates to schedule the next surveillance tests?
11. How will you prevent exceeding the 3.25 times the surveillance interval for future surveillance tests in general?
Please provide the above information within 30 days of receipt of this lette In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Feaeral Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roo The responses directed by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-51 Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact u
Sincerely, Original signed by/
J. Nelson Grace J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator cc: (See page 4)
e Georgia Power Company 4 JAN 121987 cc: J. P. O'Reilly, Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations
. T. Beckham, Vice President, Plant Hatch
. C. Nix, Site Operations General
/ Manager V A). Fraser, Acting Site QA Supervisor vi.. Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Licensing bec. NRC Resident Inspector V Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary Document Control Desk-Strce of Georgia RII-GJenkins 01 /
RI RII RI
{- RII@ A L RC oteau:ht FJCa htrell% VLBrownlee LReyes j DWa er MErnst 12/ /86 'g /06 12/~)/86 $(/7/86 / $ /86 12/
1 (> 0 p/r7 / /
' NIT' K'
